After revisiting this, keeping the changes file unaffected seems not easily possible in this case, as the test specifically tests whether the updated source text has been written to the changes file. I have just merged this and Kernel-ct.1355 via KernelTests-ct.452, Compiler-ct.496, and Kernel-ct.1554.<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
Christoph<br>
<br>
<font color="#808080">---<br>
</font><font color="#808080"><i>Sent from </i></font><font color="#808080"><i><a href="https://github.com/hpi-swa-lab/squeak-inbox-talk"><font color="#808080">Squeak Inbox Talk</font></a></i></font><br>
<br>
On 2020-10-24T05:12:11-05:00, forums.jakob@resfarm.de wrote:<br>
<br>
&gt; commits-2 wrote<br>
&gt; &gt; Should I invest further complexity into this test for the purpose of<br>
&gt; &gt; keeping the production source logs clean?<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; I think keeping the logs clean is a worthy goal (especially if you have to<br>
&gt; recover changes after not saving for a while).<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Does your implementation still log anything? Since the test does not use<br>
&gt; Monticello I think it should be silent. For extra emphasis you could have<br>
&gt; used compileSilently: instead of compile:, though I thought muting the<br>
&gt; SystemChangeNotifier would be sufficient here.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; I tend to override performTest: to wrap the doSilently: around the test<br>
&gt; method execution, if most of the tests in the class are exepected to log<br>
&gt; something.<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; --<br>
&gt; Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Squeak-Dev-f45488.html