Re: run-tests vs phpruntests

On 16/05/2012 03:19, Nuno Lopes wrote:

On 05/15/2012 08:23 AM, zoe slattery wrote:

Does anyone have any strong views on how 'forgiving' run-tests.php should be? For example, this test: ext/libxml/tests/bug61367-read.phpt has this --INI-- section: --INI-- open_basedir=. ; Suppress spurious "Trying to get property of non-object" notices error_reporting=E_ALL & ~E_NOTICE run-tests.php just ignores any line that is not of the form 'something=somethingelse', in the parallel run-tests.php code we currently throw an exception in an INI setting is not of the form

'something=somethingelse', so this test won't run because of the

'comment' line. The behaviour should be consistent which can be achieved either by modifying tests or making the new code do what run-tests.php currently does. I have a slight preference for not allowing anything in an INI section except an ini setting, this would mean changing these two tests. Anyone have strong views either way?

I'd prefer allowing comments, but if it affects only 2 out 12,000+ ests I wouldn't complain if it were changed. Silently ignoring non well-formed assignments doesn't really count as allowing comments.

I kinda agree here with Chris.. Having comments is nice for documentation. If that reveals too difficult to implement, just move the comments to the script. Nuno Thanks Nuno and Chris. It turned out that one tests didn't actually need that INI setting anyway. The other one does, so I have moved the comment to the FILE section.

There is a always --DESCRIPTION-- for people that want to write something a bit more. Zoe