Jeff Latimer wrote:
dlls/comctl32/listview.c | 2 +- dlls/comctl32/tests/listview.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi, Jeff.
This is obviously wrong. Test will fail on native systems after your patch. What is a problem with current code, any bugs reported?
On 06/12/09 18:56, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
Jeff Latimer wrote:
dlls/comctl32/listview.c | 2 +- dlls/comctl32/tests/listview.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi, Jeff.
This is obviously wrong. Test will fail on native systems after your patch.
Why do you say that? It tests ok on XP. It was not being run on XP due to if (!load_v6_module(&ctx_cookie, &hCtx)) so it looked if it was executing ok. When I forced it to run, the original failed. In any case the test comment says it is to check that the string "test" does not become "test1", however the test is ok(strcmp(buff, test1) == 0, "Expected label text not to change\n"); which is the opposite.
What is a problem with current code, any bugs reported?
No bug.
Jeff Latimer wrote:
On 06/12/09 18:56, Nikolay Sivov wrote:
Jeff Latimer wrote:
dlls/comctl32/listview.c | 2 +- dlls/comctl32/tests/listview.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi, Jeff.
This is obviously wrong. Test will fail on native systems after your patch.
Why do you say that? It tests ok on XP.
No, it doesn't.
It was not being run on XP due to if (!load_v6_module(&ctx_cookie, &hCtx))
Then it's not supposed to run on your system.
so it looked if it was executing ok. When I forced it to run, the original failed.
You broke a logic This test needs v6 module to run.
In any case the test comment says it is to check that the string "test" does not become "test1", however the test is ok(strcmp(buff, test1) == 0, "Expected label text not to change\n"); which is the opposite.
So the comment is wrong, not the test condition. Please send a patch to change comment.
-
Jeff Latimer -
Nikolay Sivov