[kernel32] Fix inf file parsing

[Paul Vriens]

On Mar 25, 2009, at 20:44, James Hawkins <truiken at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Paul Vriens
> <paul.vriens.wine at gmail.com> wrote:
>> James Hawkins wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 8:25 AM, Paul Vriens <paul.vriens.wine at gmail.com 
>>> >
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This fixes bug 17843 but I'm not sure it's a 100% correct. James  
>>>> didn't
>>>> change
>>>> this just for the fun of it.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you're unsure of the correct fix, you should write a test case  
>>> that
>>> fails without your patch and succeeds with your patch.
>>>
>> AJ already put in a fix (similar to mine).
>>
>> I don't want to sound negative but you added loads of test cases  
>> that still
>> didn't prevent this regression.
>>
>
> That is pretty negative.  Your comment implies that the failure of the
> current test suite to be comprehensive enough means we shouldn't add
> more tests, which is incorrect.  No test suite is ever complete.  Any
> change to the code that can be tested, should be tested, and there are
> very few places that can't be tested with enough ingenuity.
>
>> That's probably the downside of todo_wine.
>
> With my last patch in the series (which needs to be reworked and more
> tests added for), there were only two todo_wine's left, and they are
> unrelated to this problem.
>
> -- 
> James Hawkins

Sorry if that came on too strong. I'm all for more tests. My point was  
that todo_wine can be a 'dangerage' thing sometimes (not specifically  
in this case).

Maybe we should even make it mandatory that fixes for regressions  
should be accompanied with tests, although I doubt that will be  
feasible.

Paul