change wording of ok()-messages in winspool-tests?

[Julian Rüger]

Hi Francois and list,

[/nitpick-mode on]
I'm preparing a patch to fix typos/spelling/grammar in
dlls/winspool.drv/tests/info.c, where I stumbled across repeated
messages like

ok( !retval, "function result wrong! False expected\n");
or
    ok( size == exact, "Parameter size wrong! %d expected got %d\n",
        exact, size);

Do you think it's worth changing these?
(I think "Wrong function result: 'false' expected\n", and "Wrong
parameter size: expected %d, got %d\n" would be better)

Do we have guidelines for strings like these?
For example: start with a captial letter, no punctuation at the end...

What tests have "good" style I can use as reference?

Best regards,
Julian

PS: Am I bike shedding here? Does anyone care about stuff like this?
Sorry for wasting your time ;)

[Alexandre Julliard]

Julian Rüger  writes:
> Hi Francois and list,
>
> [/nitpick-mode on]
> I'm preparing a patch to fix typos/spelling/grammar in
> dlls/winspool.drv/tests/info.c, where I stumbled across repeated
> messages like
> ok( !retval, "function result wrong! False expected\n");
>
> or
>     ok( size == exact, "Parameter size wrong! %d expected got %d\n",
>         exact, size);
>
> Do you think it's worth changing these?
> (I think "Wrong function result: 'false' expected\n", and "Wrong
> parameter size: expected %d, got %d\n" would be better)
>
> Do we have guidelines for strings like these?
> For example: start with a captial letter, no punctuation at the end...
>
> What tests have "good" style I can use as reference?
>
> Best regards,
> Julian
>
> PS: Am I bike shedding here? Does anyone care about stuff like this?

Test failure messages are not supposed to be seen, if they are seen it's
a bug. So it's not worth spending effort making them look nice or
consistent.

[Francois Gouget]

On Sun, 24 Jun 2012, Julian Rüger wrote:
[...]
> ok( !retval, "function result wrong! False expected\n");
>
> or
>     ok( size == exact, "Parameter size wrong! %d expected got %d\n",
>         exact, size);
>
> Do you think it's worth changing these?

Not necessarily. The only thing I'd feel like changing would be to 
include the function name in the message. That said if the test fails 
you get the line number and thus can inspect the code to figure it out 
(and most likely you'll have to inspect the code anyway). I just feel 
like it's nice to know what function was tested just by looking at the 
message.

[...]
> Do we have guidelines for strings like these?
> For example: start with a captial letter, no punctuation at the end...
>
> What tests have "good" style I can use as reference?

We don't have guidelines for this.

[Julian Rüger]

Francois Gouget wrote:
> > Do you think it's worth changing these?
>
> Not necessarily. The only thing I'd feel like changing would be to [...]

Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Test failure messages are not supposed to be seen, if they are seen it's
> a bug. So it's not worth spending effort making them look nice or
> consistent.

OK, I won't bother then ;)

Thanks a lot for your comments!