Can you give some examples Michele? The errors checked in the test are to give the user some indication of what failed (parse error, missing variable definition, ...) - is the proxy you're working on able to report these errors? i dont think the exact wording matters but the nature of the content is what's important and how it can help the end user figure out what went wrong.
-r On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 8:49 PM Michele Sciabarra <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello all, > > I am implementing an action loop based runtime for Python. So far I > managed to have everything working and I have a runtime that passes all the > mandatory tests. However, I am trying to run it against the existing tests > for the Python runtime and I am hitting the head against the expected > behavior for reporting compilation errors. > > Looks like the current runtime tests expects (and checks) that certain > errors are reported in stdout/stderr and produces output guards also for > the init action, something novel for me. > > Currently, ActionLoop expects a compiler either is silent if there are no > errors OR reports errors in stdout/stderr. However, the output of the > compiler is captured and returned as part of the answer to the init > (either {"ok":true} or {"error":"output-of-the-compiler"}. In particular, > ActionLoop at init time does not produce any guard nor any output in the > log. > > What I should do? To pass those tests I should change the current > ActionLoop behavior, but I do not know if is it important. I am trying to > make it compatible a pass all the tests for expected output but I think I > can instead change the test at least for those behaviors related to error > reporting at init time. > > Please advise. > > -- > Michele Sciabarra > [email protected] >
