PrintDlgEx [1/7]: Add common failure checks and a trace.

Juan Lang juan.lang at gmail.com
Fri Sep 19 10:03:57 CDT 2008


Hi Gal,

please bottom post here.

> I indeed submitted a set of tests that included these cases. Specifically:
>
> http://www.nabble.com/PrintDlgEx-tests--7-9-%3A-Add-tests-for-PD_RETURNDEFAULT.-td19293210.html#a19293210
>
> http://www.nabble.com/PrintDlgEx-tests--9-9-%3A-Add-a-test-for-PD_RETURNDEFAULT-that-is-specific-to-PrintDlgExW.-td19293240.html#a19293240

Yes, and they weren't committed, perhaps because they don't pass
without your implementation?  I don't know, I didn't try.

My point is, rather than including comments that say this and that
behavior was tested on Windows version xyz, you should include test
cases that demonstrate that, in one of two ways:
1. As a patch with tests that currently fails, each marked with todo_wine.
2. As a patch containing both implementation and tests.

If you choose the first option, your implementation patch should
remove the todo_wine from the (now succeeding) tests.
--Juan



More information about the wine-devel mailing list