Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com writes:
@@ -3217,7 +3295,7 @@ static void test_showwindow(void)
trace("calling ShowWindow( SW_SHOWMAXIMIZE ) for invisible popup window\n"); ShowWindow(hwnd, SW_SHOWMAXIMIZED);
- ok_sequence(WmShowMaxPopupResizedSeq, "ShowWindow(SW_SHOWMAXIMIZED):popup", FALSE);
- ok_sequence(WmShowMaxPopupResizedSeq, "ShowWindow(SW_SHOWMAXIMIZED):popup", TRUE);
It would be better to avoid turning working tests back into todos, because it means a lot of things will no longer be properly regression tested, since todo applies to the whole sequence.
"Alexandre Julliard" julliard@winehq.org wrote:
@@ -3217,7 +3295,7 @@ static void test_showwindow(void)
trace("calling ShowWindow( SW_SHOWMAXIMIZE ) for invisible popup window\n"); ShowWindow(hwnd, SW_SHOWMAXIMIZED);
- ok_sequence(WmShowMaxPopupResizedSeq, "ShowWindow(SW_SHOWMAXIMIZED):popup", FALSE);
- ok_sequence(WmShowMaxPopupResizedSeq, "ShowWindow(SW_SHOWMAXIMIZED):popup", TRUE);
It would be better to avoid turning working tests back into todos, because it means a lot of things will no longer be properly regression tested, since todo applies to the whole sequence.
It would be better, yes, but I don't see how adding new tests could avoid that if the existing test fail already. I don't see how I can make existing tests not fail while adding new ones and not touching any real code. I can resend the patch with omitting the lines in my patch which mark existing (failing) tests as todo, is that what you need? Certaily I can have a look why existing tests fail (do they fail for you?), but that has nothing to do with this my patch.
"Dmitry Timoshkov" dmitry@codeweavers.com writes:
It would be better, yes, but I don't see how adding new tests could avoid that if the existing test fail already. I don't see how I can make existing tests not fail while adding new ones and not touching any real code. I can resend the patch with omitting the lines in my patch which mark existing (failing) tests as todo, is that what you need? Certaily I can have a look why existing tests fail (do they fail for you?), but that has nothing to do with this my patch.
No, the existing tests don't fail for me, otherwise they wouldn't be in the tree.
"Alexandre Julliard" julliard@winehq.org wrote:
No, the existing tests don't fail for me, otherwise they wouldn't be in the tree.
They didn't fail for me either, but started to fail very recently, I'll investigate why. In the mean time, could you please commit my patch without s/FALSE/TRUE/ changes?