Re: Add a test showing that SaveDC after GetDC should return 1

[Alexandre Julliard]

Dmitry Timoshkov  writes:
> +todo("windows")
> +{   /* XP returns COMPLEXREGION although dump_region reports only 1 rect */
> - ok(ret == SIMPLEREGION, "IntersectClipRect returned %d instead of SIMPLEREGION\n", ret);
>
> +}

It doesn't make sense to add a todo for Windows, we won't be able to
fix the bug there...

Add a test showing that SaveDC after GetDC should return 1

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

"Alexandre Julliard"  wrote:
> > +todo("windows")
> > +{   /* XP returns COMPLEXREGION although dump_region reports only 1 rect */
> > - ok(ret == SIMPLEREGION, "IntersectClipRect returned %d instead of SIMPLEREGION\n", ret);
> >
> > +}
>
> It doesn't make sense to add a todo for Windows, we won't be able to
> fix the bug there...

Right, but that's how we can see if the bug is fixed in the future
windows versions.

Add a test showing that SaveDC after GetDC should return 1

[Alexandre Julliard]

"Dmitry Timoshkov"  writes:
> "Alexandre Julliard"  wrote:
> > It doesn't make sense to add a todo for Windows, we won't be able to
> > fix the bug there...
>
> Right, but that's how we can see if the bug is fixed in the future
> windows versions.

That's not what the todo mechanism is for. The purpose of the
regression tests is not to debug Windows, it's to capture the Windows
behavior, no matter how broken it may be. We can't add todos just
because we don't like the way an API behaves; we have to deal with it.