Help with SUnit
John M McIntosh
johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com
Fri Jan 23 00:32:23 UTC 2004
On Jan 22, 2004, at 12:54 PM, Michael Roberts wrote:
> I'm not going mad, I do remember this original method. I'm not saying
> there is anything wrong with this new method of course. This came in
> with changeset 5593-TestRunnerEnh-nk.
>
>
> 'Made debugger step to beginning of failed test case.'
> Maybe I need to understand what this change did?
>
> Well there have been loads of changes since then. So I assume that
> people are happy with the way that SUnit works.
>
>> I'm not sure which image or SUnit version you are using, you might
>> want
>> to try with 3.7a and see what happens since I was unable to reproduce
>> your results.
> Yes I should have said which versions I was using. I try and always
> use a fresh and latest image for these kind of postings.
>
> I don't wish to sound rude, but would you mind trying my test with the
> latest version of everything since I think I have the latest version
> and I'm not sure you do :-)
Ok, I updated a test image and recreated your problems. I'd bet no-one
else has done things like
set instance variables to null in the teardown methods so they've not
uncovered this bug.
Perhaps by the time I wade thru the rest of my email and squeak mail
then someone (Ned?) will
have come up with a fix.
--
========================================================================
===
John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com> 1-800-477-2659
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
========================================================================
===
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|