On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 11:40:40AM -0800, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Andriy Palamarchuk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I suggest to use explicit checks and print descriptive > > messages in case of falure. I agree, this approach is > > more labour-intensive, especially for tests using IPC. > > It is also much more maintainable as soon as you coded > > it. Everything, including differences between > > different Windows platforms is documented directly in > > the code! This gives much better control. E.g, it is > > possible to comment-out part of the test, still > > getting meaningful results what worked, what did not. > > I definitely agree here, having the code check everything itself is > much better that having to compare the output. The drawback is that it > makes tests more complex to write, so I'm not sure if we want to make > it the rule for all tests. I think we do want to do this :-) It doesn't add significant overhead to the test procedure, and as far as "third-party" (aka "Windows") developers are concerned, they could just hack away at their specific test, and even if they miss version checking, then we could easily add this, I guess, as someone *will* notice and will enhance it properly.
-- Andreas Mohr Stauferstr. 6, D-71272 Renningen, Germany Tel. +49 7159 800604 http://home.nexgo.de/andi.mohr/
