On Tue Oct 07 06:53:58 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In fixing the Complex PMC in r31749, I revealed a problem in our > read-only PMC tests. In t/pmc/ro.t, test 5 gets an error as expected, > but the error it gets complains that add_p_ic_p doesn't exist (it hasn't > existed for years, if ever). So, test 5 isn't actually testing anything > useful. > > I'm a bit suspicious about the whole test file now, because it's not > testing for the actual text of the error message, it's just testing that > it got *some* error. The cage task is to review the test file and > improve the error testing, so that if the read-only error is masked by > some other error, the tests will fail. > > One possible direction is to use exception handlers to trap the > read-only exceptions inside the tests, instead of just relying on the > exit code. > > Allison
Most of the tests are rewritten in r31997 so that only the appropriate exception types are caught. I also split the ROTest tests into a separate file in src/dynpmc/rotest.t so t/distro/test_file_coverage.t would be happy (r32001,2). Rewriting the tests uncovered a couple errors in the tests themselves. All these have been resolved to both correctly test ro functionality and pass (unless I'm missing a subtlety). The last test in t/pmc/ro.t needs a look, but it has a separate ticket. I'm marking this one resolved.
