Am Dienstag, den 08.03.2005, 09:11 -0600 schrieb Archie Cobbs: > Roman Kennke wrote: > >>http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/classpath/2004-12/threads.html#00137 > >> > >>we talked about putting together somehow a list of Mauve tests that > >>all Classpath-based VMs should expect to pass, along with another > >>(complementary) list of those tests a Classpath-based VM should > >>expect to fail. > > > > Sorry if I am completely naive here, but why should there be tests, that > > a Classpath-based VM should be expected to fail?? Isn't the whole point > > to (ideally) pass all tests? If there would be such a test, I would > > rather rewrite the harness.check(cond) into harness.check(!cond) so that > > the (expected) failure passes... > > Ideally there should be no expected failures. In reality there always > are, simply because some feature is unimplemented or some bug has not > been tracked down yet. Obviously, any expected failures are good > starting points for anyone looking to improve Classpath... another > benefit of having (or being able to easily generate) such a list.
Ah, now I'm understanding. I think maybe you mean the mauve HTML pages that I once put together? This basically tested different runtimes against the Mauve suite and formatted to Mauve output nicely into HTML for displaying in a browser, so it is easily visible which tests fails (red) and which don't (green). Is that what you mean? If yes, then I can tell you that the nessecary scripts are not online ATM due to lack of resources on my side, but probably soon will be available again on developer.c.o. At least I hope so... /Roman
signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
_______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list Classpath@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath