Skip to content

Make more String tests run on Linux #1131

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Feb 4, 2016

Conversation

glessard
Copy link
Contributor

This PR moves a number of String-related tests from test/1_stdlib/NSStringAPI.swift, where they couldn't run because the file requires objc_interop.

A few test cases have new xfail annotations, related to sort order (https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-530) and comparisons involving embedded nulls (https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-630).

@gribozavr
Copy link
Contributor

@swift-ci Please test

Documenting a few failed test cases along the way
@glessard
Copy link
Contributor Author

I don't know what made the CI tests fail, but I had left a .skip behind that shouldn't have been there. Now removed.

@gribozavr
Copy link
Contributor

@swift-ci Please test

1 similar comment
@gribozavr
Copy link
Contributor

@swift-ci Please test

@glessard
Copy link
Contributor Author

glessard commented Feb 2, 2016

The non-Linux failures don't seem directly related to this PR; should another test be run?

@gribozavr
Copy link
Contributor

@swift-ci Please test

tkremenek added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 4, 2016
Make more String tests run on Linux.
@tkremenek tkremenek merged commit 1c92a7a into swiftlang:master Feb 4, 2016
checkComparable(expected, lhs, rhs, stackTrace: stackTrace.withCurrentLoc())
}

for test in comparisonTests {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why did you move the loop out of the test? Doesn't the test provide the reference to the test data when it fails?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, I see -- you added custom XFAILs. Never mind.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I thought this would be better than duplicating the tests just for xfail cases.
Thanks for reviewing.

@gribozavr
Copy link
Contributor

@glessard Thank you for this!

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