Skip to content

Conversation

@som-snytt
Copy link
Contributor

Vulpix only checks output if there is an existing check file.
Note that partest pos tests used to accept an optional check
file, but the confusing behavior is that if you delete the
check file, it always passes, unlike a neg test which takes
a missing check file as an empty one.

In this case, a semantic merge conflict resulted in a neg test
with println instead of assert, but with no check file.
Happily, such a test can never fail. Sadly, sometimes our
code is broken.

Vulpix only checks output if there is an existing check file.
Note that partest pos tests used to accept an optional check
file, but the confusing behavior is that if you delete the
check file, it always passes, unlike a neg test which takes
a missing check file as an empty one.

In this case, a semantic merge conflict resulted in a neg test
with println instead of assert, but with no check file.
Happily, such a test can never fail. Sadly, sometimes our
code is broken.
Copy link
Member

@dottybot dottybot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hello, and thank you for opening this PR! 🎉

All contributors have signed the CLA, thank you! ❤️

Have an awesome day! ☀️

@smarter smarter merged commit d6a2d59 into scala:master Apr 24, 2020
@som-snytt som-snytt deleted the issue/fix-test branch April 24, 2020 13:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants