On Sat, Jan 21, 2017 at 10:26 AM, Simon Fraser wrote:
>> On Jan 21, 2017, at 12:56 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>>
>> I'd be strongly opposed to adding yet another file that configures how
>> tests are run. Even today, it's impossible to reason about whether a
>> given test is expected to pass or fail
> On Jan 21, 2017, at 12:56 AM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
>
> I'd be strongly opposed to adding yet another file that configures how
> tests are run. Even today, it's impossible to reason about whether a
> given test is expected to pass or fail because there are multiple
> TestExpectations in different
On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 9:09 PM, youenn fablet wrote:
>
>> • If a test wants to change a RuntimeEnabledFeature:
>>
>> - No set pattern.
>> - Some tests use internals.settings but this seems inappropriate, since
>> the page has already loaded
>> - Some tests use the special comment syntax parsed by
> • If a test wants to change a RuntimeEnabledFeature:
>
> - No set pattern.
> - Some tests use internals.settings but this seems inappropriate, since
> the page has already loaded
> - Some tests use the special comment syntax parsed by TestRunners; this
> makes sense, but would not be good for imp
Thanks for this writeup.
I encourage you to move this knowledge to a wiki page on trac, so we
don't lose it here in the list archives.
Michael
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
Toggling settings in tests is a confusing area, with multiple (sometimes
conflicting) ways to modify settings.
After cleaning things up a bit in r211006 I wanted to document my understanding
of the patterns I see right now. Much of this was new to me so others may find
it useful.
Different Typ
6 matches
Mail list logo
