James Keenan via RT wrote:
> On Wed Jul 30 16:58:55 2008, jk...@verizon.net wrote:
>
>> t/op/arithmetics.t
>>
>> t/pmc/complex.t
>>
>> t/pmc/float.t
>>
>
> For the record, according to our Smolder reports for MSWin32, these 3
> files have tests that are either still TODO-ed out or are failing
> o
Will Coleda wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 7:09 PM, James Keenan via RT
> wrote:
>> Interestingly enough, we are also getting failures on these 4 test files
>> on the OpenBSD Smolder tester:
>>
>> http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/report_details/3135
>>
>> But, AFAICT, the Smolder
On Wed Jul 30 16:26:13 2008, coke wrote:
> >
>
> Click "Goto first failure". Click "Failed". Click the box of the same
> color as the failed box: You should see the tap output:
>
Thanks, Coke. That enabled me to verify that for these 3 test files:
t/op/arithmetics.t
t/pmc/complex.t
t/pmc/fl
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 7:09 PM, James Keenan via RT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Interestingly enough, we are also getting failures on these 4 test files
> on the OpenBSD Smolder tester:
>
> http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/report_details/3135
>
> But, AFAICT, the Smolder server do
Interestingly enough, we are also getting failures on these 4 test files
on the OpenBSD Smolder tester:
http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/report_details/3135
But, AFAICT, the Smolder server doesn't identify the particular tests
within the file which are failing.
kid51
Would it be possible to get an update from Win32 users on these tests?
Specifically, output of 'prove -v' for these tests:
t/op/arithmetics.t
t/pmc/complex.t
t/pmc/float.t
(I'm going to assume that the sprintf test is still problematic.)
Thank you very much.
kid51
t/op/sprintf.t has been passing on Win32 with VC++ (r29667), see
http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/report_details/2429
http://smolder.plusthree.com/app/public_projects/tap_stream/2429/351
ok 157 - [%.0g] C99 standard mandates minus sign but C89 does not skip:
MSWin32 VMS hpux:10.
On Sat Mar 29 08:41:56 2008, rblasch wrote:
>
> t/op/sprintf.t
> not ok 157 - [%.0g] C99 standard mandates minus sign but C89 does not
> skip: MSWin32 VMS hpux:10.20 openbsd netbsd:1.5 irix actual: >0<
>
This particular TODO-ed test has begun to "unexpectedly" PASS for me on
linux-i386 and darw
chromatic wrote:
On Friday 28 March 2008 11:55:30 James Keenan via RT wrote:
Am confused. What diagnostic output beyond 'prove -v' are you referring
to?
For example...
t/op/arithmetics1..26
ok 1 - take the negative of a native integer
ok 2 - take the absolute of
Ah, I see that all I was sent was the output of 'prove' -- not 'prove -v'.
I'll have to see if the original tester can re-run the tests.
On Friday 28 March 2008 11:55:30 James Keenan via RT wrote:
> Am confused. What diagnostic output beyond 'prove -v' are you referring
> to?
For example...
t/op/arithmetics1..26
ok 1 - take the negative of a native integer
ok 2 - take the absolute of a native integer
On Fri Mar 28 11:41:28 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Any chance of getting the diagnostic output from the failing tests?
>
Am confused. What diagnostic output beyond 'prove -v' are you referring to?
Once I complete all the postings from this session, I'll be posting
links to the various
On Friday 28 March 2008 11:06:40 James Keenan wrote:
> An experienced Perl-Win32 developer was able to configure Parrot
> successfully with 'perl Configure.pl' and build it with 'nmake'. All
> Parrot tests passed except those in the 4 named files. See
> attachment for output of 'prove -v'.
Any
# New Ticket Created by James Keenan
# Please include the string: [perl #52198]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# http://rt.perl.org/rt3/Ticket/Display.html?id=52198 >
This is one of a series of tickets reporting issues encountered at a
Parrot/Rakudo bui
14 matches
Mail list logo
