On Thu, 10 Jan 2002, Andriy Palamarchuk wrote: > > --- Jeremy White <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > However, having the diff feature allows us to more > > rapdily adapt existing programs to become tests. > > Since it's done (and it's trivial code), I don't see > > the harm in leaving in the feature. We can hide > > it/discourage in in the (as yet unwritten) doco if > you like. > > Some disadvantages of the diff approach was discussed > before. I just realized the problem which will make > using this approach practically impossible. The > problem - variations of output as result of: > 1) using different Windows versions.
.ref -> deneric reference .win95 -> win95 reference .win98 -> win98 reference etc. Okay, if the difference is between nt and win 95/98/me then it may get a bit hairy. > 2) using TODO tests. The problem becomes even worse if > more than one Win32 implementation project (e.g. ODIN) > starts to use the test, because list of TODOs is > project-specific .ref.diff files. If the diff between the .out and the relevant .ref file matches that diff file, then all is good. [...] > Now, imagin combinations of these :-) WONTFIX will not be very practical. But are they really needed? I would say that TODOs should be enough. > Explicit check, on other hand, nicely comments all > these conditions in one place - in code. Except that in some cases they will make the checks pretty complex. -- Francois Gouget [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://fgouget.free.fr/ In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice they're different.
