That's cool. Can you file a bug against smokecheck? (I think these can be addressed by adding try/catch around them for the dhtml case.)
On 2006-08-23, at 09:49 EDT, Philip Romanik wrote: > Hi Tucker, > > Sorry for the constant stream of mail. I'm going to switch gears > because I don't think I can use smokecheck.lzx any longer. There > are some dhtml errors caused by the tests themselves. For example, > in lzunit-test.lzl some lines are invalid Javascript. Some examples, > > undefined.flooglesnort; > flooglesnort(); > nonFunction(); > nonFunction.flooglesnort(); > nonFunction.nonMethod(); > > I'm going to work with some of the other tests and then get into > the demo apps. Running smokecheck to this point has been very > instructive because it uncovered a number of warnings that I fixed. > > Phil > > > > _______________________________________________ Laszlo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
