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