On 07/12/2007, Allison Randal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andy Dougherty wrote: > > > > Whether this is a defect in the vtables_4 test sourcefile for failing to > > initialize the vtables, or whether pmc_new ought to be more defensive, I > > can't say. > > Looks like a bug in the test, as there are other things in Parrot_exit > that won't behave appropriately without an initialized vtable. PTC, this > is a new test file you added a few days ago. Do you have some more > details on what the 4th test is testing?
Essentially the test is just trying to exercise the code in src/vtables.c (I'm still on a bit of a learning curve wrt C-related tests within Parrot, so it's highly likely I've misunderstood something in writing the test). My guess is that the test certainly needs fixing, and probably the docs for the functions in src/vtables.c extended so that one has a good idea how to use the functions. As an aside, I did find that Parrot_new_vtable() is almost never used in the Parrot source; Parrot_clone_vtable() is used instead, so there was a bit of guesswork involved in writing the tests. Is Parrot_new_vtable() therefore necessary? Paul
