On 16/04/13 09:40, Michael Van Canneyt wrote: > > I understand, but then I'd be stuck with lots of useless warnings, > since there is no way to differentiate a real from a false one. > > Better no warnings than lots of false warnings.
I don't understand you statement. What false warnings? The test didn't actually do any checks - so shouldn't be considered a valid test case. FPCUnit reports: Errors and Failures. FPTest reports: Errors, Failures, Warnings and Excluded Tests The "no test executed" warnings can be toggled on or off at runtime too. So if you didn't want to see it, you don't have to - but it boggles the mind why you would want to hide such a test oversight. You can also tell the framework to promote "no test executed" warnings to test failures. On a side note: Excluded Tests are test that are individually excluded from a test run for whatever reason. The state is remembered even after you disable and re-enable a test class, test suite or test project. In console output they will be marked with an 'x' symbol. In the GUI treeview the test will have a red X symbol. Regards, - Graeme - -- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
