Re: Re: PHPT --SKIPIF--

On Thu, 05 Apr 2007 15:57:59 -0700, Joe Stump wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > >> If you run the tests out of order, it will fail, so you need to be sure >> that the OS will sort them properly. For instance, try >> >> pear run-tests 001-test-a.phpt 002-test-b.phpt >> >> and see if it still works. > > This works. Running them backwards would cause the check to not work as > expected, but it wouldn't fail catastrophically either. > >> What I meant though is *why* do you need to skip a test if the previous >> test failed? Why not just let them both fail? > > Because, if 001-test-a fails and 002-test-b relies on 001-test-a for > something (ie. data written to the DB, memcache, etc.) 002-tests-b isn't > actually failed. It's like saying that your test of gd failed when gd > isn't installed at all. The test didn't actually fail because it never > had a chance of running. It should skip the test and say why and move > on. Isn't the point of testing to keep each part as a self contained beast ? Anyway I've always believed that tests should be able to run by them self and thus not having the exact problem you are describing ;-) You could take the approach to have a setup/teardown function in the tests to setup the data you need for each individual test. Regards Helgi -- There are no stupid questions, only stupid people