Regression Test - kernel atom test

[Alexandre Julliard]

"Dmitry Timoshkov" <dmitry at baikal.ru> writes:

> May I see a log? Do I need to fix them, or someone with NT4 around should
> look at it?

Here's what I get (note that some of these already exist in the
current version):

atom.c:55:Unicode APIs are supported
atom.c:102: Test failed: succeeded adding c000
atom.c:111: Test failed: succeeded adding c000
atom.c:102: Test failed: succeeded adding c001
atom.c:111: Test failed: succeeded adding c001
[etc....]
atom.c:102: Test failed: succeeded adding ffff
atom.c:111: Test failed: succeeded adding ffff
atom.c:136: Test failed: GlobalGetAtomNameA succeeded on short buffer
atom.c:172: Test failed: succeded
atom.c:203: Test failed: succeded
atom.c:208: Test failed: succeded
atom.c:257: Test failed: infinite loop
atom.c:285: Test failed: delete atom succeded
atom.c:303: Test failed: add succeded
atom.c:308: Test failed: find succeded
atom.c:322: Test failed: add succeded
atom.c:324: Test failed: find succeded
atom: 229529 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 32778 failures.

And this is what I get with your codepage test:

codepage.c:39: Test failed: should return an error and not touch buffer
codepage.c:46: Test failed: should return an error and not touch buffer
codepage: 4 tests executed, 0 marked as todo, 2 failures.

> I asssume we should adhere win2000 behaviour. Am I right? I'll remove
> redundant tests for unicode_OS and resubmit patch then.

We don't necessarily have to adhere to win2000. We can choose the
behavior that makes the most sense, or that is the fastest.

> One more question: should we add a point out in the test that tests are
> platform specific?

Not sure what you mean; the tests must not be platform specific, they
must work on all platforms. Things that only work on a given platform
don't need to be tested for, since it's very unlikely that apps depend
on them (and we can add a test once we find such an app).

-- 
Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.com