neoneye at adslhome.dk
Tue Feb 17 15:08:08 EST 2004
On Tue, 2004-02-17 at 16:13, Chad Fowler wrote:
> On 17 Feb 2004, Simon Strandgaard wrote:
> # Now all tests passes ok (100% as you wished).
> # And there is no more pending bugs.
> # I don't know what to do now, any suggestions :-)
> # Does AllTests.rb pass ok on your machine(s)?
> [chad at ns1 rubicon]$ uname -a
> Linux ns1.chadfowler.com 2.4.7-10 #1 Thu Sep 6 16:46:36 EDT 2001 i686
> I have attached the results. Haven't had any time to look at the failures
> yet, though. I ran it with 1.8 and with the current ruby cvs. 3 problems
> in each, though it looks like they are different problems.
There isn't any file attached. Try again ;-)
3 problems doesn't sound bad. I would be worried if all test passed ok,
without our interaction.
> I'm going to work now on getting the web stuff imported into CVS. I'd
> like to completely rip out the rubicon xmarshal stuff in both the rubicon
> distribution and the web code, clean up the post.rb hack, and then start
> thinking about how this all might integrate into Ruby's "make test".
Good idea. I have added this as a Feature Request.
Last night I identified methods which needs to be tested. I compared the
C source against the testsuite. With these files (I hope I don't have
forgotten any methods):
fetch, insert, values_at, zip, transpose
default_proc, merge, merge!, values_at
casecmp, insert, lstrip, lstrip!, match, rstrip, rstrip!, to_sym
all?, any?, inject, partition, sort_by, zip
There is 3 items on the TODO list:
More information about the Rubytests-devel