Re: test for GetAcceptLanguagesA

[Alexandre Julliard]

Stefan Leichter  writes:
> before removing the acsii calls from GetAcceptLanguagesW, i like to see the 
> results of the attached tests. This will hopefuly save me some work when 
> rewriting the function. The tests passes on my Win2k system.

But they fail on Wine, so I can't apply the patch.

test for GetAcceptLanguagesA

[Stefan Leichter]

Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Stefan Leichter  writes:
> > before removing the acsii calls from GetAcceptLanguagesW, i like to see the 
> > results of the attached tests. This will hopefuly save me some work when 
> > rewriting the function. The tests passes on my Win2k system.
>
> But they fail on Wine, so I can't apply the patch.

Its not a fault of the tests that they fail on wine, its a fault of 
wine. For my understanding the test are created to show that either the 
behaviour of wine is correct (when the test succeeds) or that something 
left to do one wine (when a test fails)!?

Why can not someone write a test because (s)he found a bug and leave is 
to someone else to fix the problem. The first one might not be able to 
fix the problem!

test for GetAcceptLanguagesA

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

"Stefan Leichter"  wrote:
> Its not a fault of the tests that they fail on wine, its a fault of 
> wine. For my understanding the test are created to show that either the 
> behaviour of wine is correct (when the test succeeds) or that something 
> left to do one wine (when a test fails)!?
>
> Why can not someone write a test because (s)he found a bug and leave is 
> to someone else to fix the problem. The first one might not be able to 
> fix the problem!

Of course you can write tests for features either missing or not properly
implemented in Wine. Just do not forget to enclose them in todo_wine.

test for GetAcceptLanguagesA

[Mike Hearn]

On Thu, 27 May 2004 12:17:15 +0200, Stefan Leichter wrote:
> Its not a fault of the tests that they fail on wine, its a fault of 
> wine. For my understanding the test are created to show that either the 
> behaviour of wine is correct (when the test succeeds) or that something 
> left to do one wine (when a test fails)!?

That is what the todo_wine { } macro is for. Surround tests that you know
will fail with todo_wine and the meaning of ok is inverted.