Nikolay Sivov wrote:
Paul Vriens wrote:
Paul Vriens wrote:
Nikolay Sivov wrote:
This test fails to create window sometimes on Win95, let's turn it into general failure.
Changelog: - replace assert() with ok() test
From b63fc6defb497505ecaab4921449327e875ab252 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Nikolay Sivov bunglehead@gmail.com Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 14:26:37 +0400 Subject: Use ok() test instead of assert()
dlls/comctl32/tests/ipaddress.c | 3 +-- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/dlls/comctl32/tests/ipaddress.c b/dlls/comctl32/tests/ipaddress.c index d04223c..b8f30e4 100644 --- a/dlls/comctl32/tests/ipaddress.c +++ b/dlls/comctl32/tests/ipaddress.c @@ -33,8 +33,6 @@ static HWND create_ipaddress_control (void) handle = CreateWindowEx(0, WC_IPADDRESS, NULL, WS_BORDER|WS_VISIBLE, 0, 0, 0, 0, NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL);
- assert(handle);
- return handle;
}
@@ -45,6 +43,7 @@ static void test_get_set_text(void) INT r;
hwnd = create_ipaddress_control();
- ok(hwnd != NULL, "Expected window to be created\n");
Shouldn't you insert a return here when hwnd is NULL. The following tests will fail as well I guess.
Just had a look and it seems that only one box actually has this failure. Maybe a win_skip() would be 'better'?
hwnd = create_ipaddress_control(); if (!hwnd) { win_skip(); return; }
Maybe even printing the last error in that win_skip() ?
Especially as MSDN states:
The IP address control is implemented in version 4.71 and later of Comctl32.dll.
And this box has 4.70.0.1146.
Maybe it's true. But what about two others boxes: http://test.winehq.org/data/bf353f180d622cbf8508af7dbc9590e33293a6ab/95_gvg-...
http://test.winehq.org/data/bf353f180d622cbf8508af7dbc9590e33293a6ab/95_fg-w...
Version reported as 4.0, so it's pure Win95 - tests pass on it.
Not really, all tests are skipped on these two boxes ;).