Re: Add a test showing that SaveDC after GetDC should return 1
"Dmitry Timoshkov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > "Alexandre Julliard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> It doesn't make sense to add a todo for Windows, we won't be able to >> fix the bug there... > > Right, but that's how we can see if the bug is fixed in the future > windows versions. That's not what the todo mechanism is for. The purpose of the regression tests is not to debug Windows, it's to capture the Windows behavior, no matter how broken it may be. We can't add todos just because we don't like the way an API behaves; we have to deal with it. -- Alexandre Julliard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Add a test showing that SaveDC after GetDC should return 1
"Alexandre Julliard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +todo("windows")
> > +{ /* XP returns COMPLEXREGION although dump_region reports only 1 rect */
> > +ok(ret == SIMPLEREGION, "IntersectClipRect returned %d instead of
> > SIMPLEREGION\n", ret);
> > +}
>
> It doesn't make sense to add a todo for Windows, we won't be able to
> fix the bug there...
Right, but that's how we can see if the bug is fixed in the future
windows versions.
--
Dmitry.
Re: Add a test showing that SaveDC after GetDC should return 1
Dmitry Timoshkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> +todo("windows")
> +{ /* XP returns COMPLEXREGION although dump_region reports only 1 rect */
> +ok(ret == SIMPLEREGION, "IntersectClipRect returned %d instead of
> SIMPLEREGION\n", ret);
> +}
It doesn't make sense to add a todo for Windows, we won't be able to
fix the bug there...
--
Alexandre Julliard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
