On Saturday 23 September 2006 11:30, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > * Fergal Daly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-09-23 19:35]:
> > At least then the user knows there's a problem _before_ he > > <insert misfortune caused by non-functioning module>. Remember, > > this thread is about how the toolchain is really for the user's > > benefit. Hiding failures to avoid reports about known bugs is > > for the developer's benefit, not the user, > > Maybe. Maybe not. When used to mean “todo” according to your > interpretation, then yes. When used for one of various other > use cases, then, just as likely, no. It depends on the author’s > intent in using PRETEND_OK – which is what I was saying. :-) Agreed. I might add TODO/PRETEND tests but never document the feature they exercise, so I haven't made any promise about what the module should do. I don't think that warrants the harness saying "This module might not work as you expect." It might not, as people often expect crazy things, but I'm not sure that the harness can or should assume why I added those tests. -- c
