On Fri, Jan 20, 2017 at 9:09 PM, youenn fablet <youe...@gmail.com> 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 TestRunners; this >> makes sense, but would not be good for imported tests > > > LayoutTests/tests_options.json is currently used to pass options for > imported tests, for instance whether they are slow or not. > It could be used for these options as well.
Please don't. I really hate the fact that file exists at all. We finally got rid of Skipped files that existed along side with TestExpectations. Adding yet another test configuration file would be way too confusing. > It would be good to have one unique way of setting test parameters that > cannot be set by JavaScript. > Currently we have three ways (TestExpectations, special comment syntax and > tests_options.json). > I don't like using TestExpectations for that purpose. 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 platform directories and they cascade and override with one another. - R. Niwa _______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
