On Sep 25, 2011, at 11:45 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > On Sunday, September 25, 2011 23:39:00 Brad Roberts wrote: >> >> >> Frankly, if the tests are that sensitive, the problem is the tests. A Joe >> Random downloader of the source should be able to expect the code to >> compile and past tests on a reasonably modern os. I'd argue that 8.x is >> modern enough (more so given that last I checked, 8.2 was the most recent >> 8.x release). The job of the unit tests is to test the code, not how up to >> date the distribution is. > > True, but the problem is that in order to test the correctness of the code, > the tests must be quite exact. If the tests were Posix-only, it would be > relatively easy to do. However, Windows is seriously messed up with regards > to > its DST information. It's almost always off outside of the US - especially > with > dates that are farther back - so it becomes quite difficult to test DST > switches > across OSes. Windows generally seems to do a better job with the current > year, > which is why I ended up testing 2011 for America/Santiago. I guess that I'll > just have to see if I can rework the tests a bit. Worse comes to worst, > Windows will get its own set of tests for DST, but I'm loathe to do that if I > can avoid it.
I don't suppose you can just verify that the computations are correct for the timezone data provided? It shouldn't matter how out of date my input is. What I care about is whether the math sorts out correctly. _______________________________________________ phobos mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/phobos
