[perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-22 Thread Allison Randal via RT
Underlying code issue resolved in r22405. The MMD methods were directly poking into the union value of "Integer", which doesn't work when the multi-method is being called as the closest match for a subclass of Integer.

[perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-20 Thread James Keenan via RT
No longer failing as of r22311, Oct 20 2007. Test may have been TODO-ed, in which case developer should open a separate TODO ticket for the underlying source code problem. Am resolving *this* ticket.

Re: [perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-20 Thread Bernhard Schmalhofer
Allison Randal schrieb: I saw the failing test, but didn't know where it came from or why it was there. (And until I dug into it the commit logs, I didn't even know if it was an old test that I had broken while working on the threads tests.) I added this failing, as the test '1 equals 1' in la

Re: [perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-19 Thread Allison Randal
chromatic wrote: On Friday 19 October 2007 09:30:31 Bernhard Schmalhofer wrote: Why should it be a TODO test? For one, there's no ticket for it. I saw the failing test, but didn't know where it came from or why it was there. (And until I dug into it the commit logs, I didn't even know if

Re: [perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-19 Thread chromatic
On Friday 19 October 2007 11:37:08 Bernhard Schmalhofer wrote: > chromatic schrieb: > > For two, allowing known failing bugs is the Broken Windows anti-pattern. > > Not only does it undermine confidence in the software (oh, still broken!) > > but it adds noise that makes it far more difficult to

Re: [perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-19 Thread chromatic
On Friday 19 October 2007 09:30:31 Bernhard Schmalhofer wrote: > Why should it be a TODO test? For one, there's no ticket for it. For two, allowing known failing bugs is the Broken Windows anti-pattern. Not only does it undermine confidence in the software (oh, still broken!) but it adds nois

Re: [perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-19 Thread Bernhard Schmalhofer
chromatic schrieb: On Thursday 18 October 2007 18:04:15 James Keenan wrote: Linux. r22261 [li11-226:parrot] 559 $ prove -v t/pmc/objects.t t/pmc/objects1..74 ok 1 - find_type (base class) [snip] not ok 57 - equality of subclassed Integer # Failed test (t/pmc/objects.t at line 16

Re: [perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-18 Thread chromatic
On Thursday 18 October 2007 18:04:15 James Keenan wrote: > Linux. r22261 > > [li11-226:parrot] 559 $ prove -v t/pmc/objects.t > t/pmc/objects1..74 > ok 1 - find_type (base class) > > [snip] > > not ok 57 - equality of subclassed Integer > > # Failed test (t/pmc/objects.t at line 1668) > #

[perl #46541] [BUG] t/pmc/objects.t test failures

2007-10-18 Thread via RT
# New Ticket Created by James Keenan # Please include the string: [perl #46541] # in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue. # http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=46541 > Linux. r22261 [li11-226:parrot] 559 $ prove -v t/pmc/objects.t t/pmc/objects1..74