bug-automake
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#23521: XFAIL


From: Peter Johansson
Subject: bug#23521: XFAIL
Date: Thu, 19 May 2016 09:55:51 +1000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0



On 05/19/2016 09:04 AM, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
Another common use for "expected failure" is to write tests to check
>that error conditions arise as expected, for example, by checking that
>a program raises an error when given invalid input.
I agree that XFAIL can be ambiguous, however I think this usage is not
desirable.  It gives an additional opposite meaning to XFAIL symbol
which makes it even more confusing.

I agree. When I wanna tests that a program fails with incorrect input, I prefer writing a tests that calls the program, check that it fails (exit 1 or whatever is expected), and perhaps even parse the error message, and if it looks like I expect exit 0 aka PASS.

Cheers,
Peter





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]