On 11/7/06, John Sundman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Tucker,
I'm feeling a little dense. Can you redo one of these methods using
the correct syntax please?
>> <method name="testTabClassImplicit">
>> assertEquals('tab', tabs0.bar.subviews[0].classname);
>> </method>
Thanks, jrs
On Nov 7, 2006, at 11:42 AM, P T Withington wrote:
> It is not. The new way is <instance>.constructor.classname.
>
> I took classname out of instance just to avoid pollution, since you
> could already ask the constructor and ECMA defines constructor as
> being available for every instance.
>
> On 2006-11-07, at 10:53 EST, Henry Minsky wrote:
>
>> This is listed in our list of test paths for lzunit
>> test/lzunit/testpaths.txt, but it fails
>>
>> http://localhost:8080/legals/test/components/base/lzunit-
>> basetabs.lzx ?lzr=swf7
>>
>> Tests: 6 Failures: 3 Errors: 0
>> TestFailure: Object >>> testTabClassInherited failed: Equals:
>> expected
>> "ptab" got "Object"
>> TestFailure: Object >>> testTabClassImplicit failed: Equals:
>> expected "tab"
>> got "Object"
>> TestFailure: Object >>> testTabClassDirect failed: Equals:
>> expected "ptab"
>> got "Object"
>>
>> Does this ring a bell for anyone?
>>
>> The assertions are
>> <method name="testTabClassImplicit">
>> assertEquals('tab', tabs0.bar.subviews[0].classname);
>> </method>
>>
>> <method name="testTabClassDirect">
>> assertEquals('ptab', tabs1.bar.subviews[0].classname);
>> </method>
>>
>> <method name="testTabClassInherited">
>> assertEquals('ptab', tabs2.bar.subviews[0].classname);
>> </method>
>>
>>
>> Is this no longer a valid way to ask for the class name?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Henry Minsky
>> Software Architect
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
--
Henry Minsky
Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
