ben camillo once wrote a nice mail about shouldnot: Error. If I remember correctly.
Stef On 25 Feb 2014, at 17:04, [email protected] wrote: > I'd like to better understand the semantics of "expected failures" in > TestRunner. It seems to me that if you want to ensure that a certain > operation fails, in a test you'd wrap it as follows... > > shouldFailed=false. > [ self operationThatShouldFail ] on: Error do: [ shouldFailed := true ]. > self assert: shouldFailed. > > So is tagging methods with pragma <expectedFailure> or in method > #expectedFailures a temporary measure used to bypass a failing test when the > judgment is that it is not critical to fix immediately? What is the process > for tacking and resolving expected failures. It would give a warm fuzzy > feeling if no expected failures are reported in TestRunner. Otherwise it > leaves some residual uncertainty that something is wrong, even though a > failure is "expected". > > cheers -ben >
