I suspect we have some selftests that use the current behaviour to assert the test fails when some property-constraints are violated...
Mittie > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Denis N. Antonioli > Sent: Freitag, 24. Februar 2006 11:52 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Webtest] Re: [dev] StepFailedException versus > StepExecutionException > > > > On 24 févr. 06, at 11:34, Marc Guillemot wrote: > > > Nevertheless trying to make the changes I face a case where I don't > > know what > > would be the "naturally" expected behaviour: > > > > for instance with > > <not> > > <verifyXPath/> > > </not> > > > > should the test break because verifyXPath is missing some mandatory > > parameters > > or should the test pass because the verifyXPath is nested in a > > <not> step? > > > My vote is for the test failing: > <not> inverts the meaning of a valid verification, it should not hide > syntax errors in my test. > > Otherwise, I won't have a chance to correct it. > > > Best > dna > > -- > A new version of a program isn't better because it has more > features, but because it adds features that you need. > -- Matt Neuburg, TidBITS#494 > > _______________________________________________ > WebTest mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.canoo.com/mailman/listinfo/webtest _______________________________________________ WebTest mailing list [email protected] http://lists.canoo.com/mailman/listinfo/webtest
