I'll take a look and see what we can do. I think we've largely been ignoring it because we don't directly own our own COM support (it comes from the DLR) but maybe there's something we can do here.
On the tests we do generally include only passing tests. Sometimes we will add failing tests to the suite and test for the broken behavior so we know when a bug repros. But in this case we don't have a good stand alone repro so that hasn't happened (and even if it did, it doesn't actually encourage us to fix the test, it just becomes one more test that silently 'passes'). From: users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com [mailto:users-boun...@lists.ironpython.com] On Behalf Of Vernon Cole Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 10:11 PM To: Discussion of IronPython Subject: Re: [IronPython] [ANN]: IronPython 2.6 Beta 2 Guys: Good work on the new release, and the 215 bug fixes. As usual, as soon as the new beta was announced I downloaded and tested it. Somehow I got the idea that the adodbapi test had been included in the IronPython test suite. Did you only include the tests that already pass? Issue 18222 is still unfixed -- so adodbapi still fails, and you still cannot pass a read-only buffer as a COM parameter. I realize that no one has voted up this rather obscure bug. Perhaps if it were titled "fully support DB API 2.0 compliant database access using ADO" it would have gotten more votes. Nevertheless, this issue has been outstanding for 11 months, and is the only remaining failure in adodbapi for versions 2.3 thru 3.1 of python. Please try to get to it before 2.6 final. Please !!!??? -- Vernon Cole P.S. -- I plan to make a version of adodbapi which uses real ADO.NET<http://ADO.NET>, rather than ADO via COM, but I want the current version to be solid before I start mucking it up.
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@lists.ironpython.com http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com
