Re: [PATCH 4/5] comctl32/tests: Add further tests for IImageList

[Paul Vriens]

On 11/13/2009 06:14 PM, Owen Rudge wrote:
> dlls/comctl32/tests/imagelist.c | 80
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

Hi Owen,

These tests introduce 3 failures on all 32bit XP boxes:

http://test.winehq.org/data/tests/comctl32:imagelist.html

Could you have a look?

[PATCH 4/5] comctl32/tests: Add further tests for IImageList

[Nikolay Sivov]

Owen, also please use more reasonable names for particular tests -
dotest means nothing.

On 11/17/09, Paul Vriens  wrote:
> On 11/13/2009 06:14 PM, Owen Rudge wrote:
> > dlls/comctl32/tests/imagelist.c | 80
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> Hi Owen,
>
> These tests introduce 3 failures on all 32bit XP boxes:
>
> http://test.winehq.org/data/tests/comctl32:imagelist.html
>
> Could you have a look?
>
> --
> Cheers,
>
> Paul.

[PATCH 4/5] comctl32/tests: Add further tests for IImageList

[Owen Rudge]

> Owen, also please use more reasonable names for particular tests -
> dotest means nothing.

I agree that the test names are not particularly descriptive. However, I 
chose those names to indicate that the tests match the existing DoTest 
functions. Perhaps both sets of functions should ideally given more 
descriptive names.

Cheers,

Owen

[PATCH 4/5] comctl32/tests: Add further tests for IImageList

[Nikolay Sivov]

Owen Rudge wrote:
> > Owen, also please use more reasonable names for particular tests -
> > dotest means nothing.
>
> I agree that the test names are not particularly descriptive. However, 
> I chose those names to indicate that the tests match the existing 
> DoTest functions. Perhaps both sets of functions should ideally given 
> more descriptive names.

Sure. Also existing DoTest could be merged to a single function maybe, 
so some simplification could be done here.
> Cheers,
>
> Owen