World: r3wp
[!REBOL3]
older newer | first last |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5482] | Yep. |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5483x2] | 58 is the result of # now being none. |
And 75, 101, 102. | |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5485] | Same for 75. |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5486] | 112-122 are the result of fixing bug#1602. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5487x6] | 128-131 is # again. |
AS are 135-137 and 138-141. | |
And 150-152, 153-156. | |
Ok, and that's it. | |
170+ is a erronous paste of mine :) | |
Well, so that looks like one real regression (complement on image!). | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5493x2] | I think that the error codes are checked now. Fix all your tests that try to make errors with codes not in system/catalog/errors. |
176-180 are examples of this. | |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5495x4] | Refresh the page. |
Or ignore everything past 170. | |
176-180 == 7-11 :) | |
Ok, 108 introduces 4 new errors (bad-header, bad-checksum, no-script, invalid-port-arg), renames 1 (bad-intrinsic to bad-sys-func) and changes the number of arguments for 1 (security-error) | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5499] | Then some of the others must have been changed or renamed earlier. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5500x2] | The error IDs in the tests 7-10 do not exist in either A107 or A108. |
And the error in 11 was renamed, as stated above. | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5502] | Yup. I think that error code checking came in an earlier release. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5503x6] | So those are also things where the testsuite needs to be updated. |
Well, maybe those are real regressions nevertheless. | |
At least the behaviour of error? has changed in this regard. | |
A107: >> error? make error! [type: 'foo id: 'bar] == true | |
A108: >> error? make error! [type: 'foo id: 'bar] ** Script error: invalid argument: [type: 'foo id: 'bar] ** Where: make ** Near: make error! [type: 'foo id: 'bar] | |
I think we had a CC issue for that. | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5509x5] | Nope, but the behavior of make error! has changed to actually trigger a *different* error if the error codes it is passed aren't in the catalog. ERROR? is the same. |
ERROR? isn't called in those tests because MAKE error! triggers a different error first. | |
We had a CC issue for that, and the result was adding the error code checking to make error!. | |
The fix was is alpha 98. | |
was in | |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5514] | Something changed between A107 and A108. |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5515] | A lot changed. What do you mean? |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5516x5] | In this specific case. |
Ah, I see. | |
>> make error! [type: 'foo id: 'bar] ** foo error: (improperly formatted error) | |
Shouldn't have tested with type: 'script earlier :) | |
** script error and "** Script error" are fatally similar. | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5521] | If the error checking of make error! itself is more strict in A108, cool :) |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5522x2] | So the change is that `make error!` now is strict in what error types it accepts. |
Yes, exactly. | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5524] | Oh, it must have been to error! that was fixed in a98 in the same way. Cool. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5525x3] | Or it was "unfixed" somewhen between A98 and A107 :) |
Good. | |
Should be noted on the changelog, though. | |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5528] | You should add some tests to verify that error code checking. I suggest TRY/except as a way to format the tests. |
Andreas 19-Oct-2010 [5529] | Hmm, A98 had the same behaviour as A107, for both `to error!` and `make error!`. |
BrianH 19-Oct-2010 [5530x2] | ['error = try/except [make error! [type: 'foo id: 'bar]] ['error]] |
That kind of test would help. | |
older newer | first last |