On Wednesday 01 February 2006 00:26, demerphq wrote: > And I think you've conveniently sidestepped my main point which is > that TODO tests passing are errors.
I didn't sidestep it. I just disagree. > Consider you have two TODO tests, > both of which depend on a common set of functionality. Both should > pass or both should fail. With the current model if one of them passes > its supposed to be a good thing. But its probably not, its probably an > indication of serious error. That's possible, but there's absolutely nothing in TAP to indicate such a thing. If you want this feature in your test, you have to code it yourself, using the return value of the test functions and a non-TODO test. I've never come across that situation. Having the test suite quit and say "Sorry, don't use this -- it works better than we expect" seems awfully silly. Again, there's already a way to catch your (rare) catastrophic bonus tests -- capture and check their return values. -- c
