From: Rick M. <obj...@gm...> - 2009-08-06 14:24:31
|
One of the changes I put in recently extended the condition traceback lines all the way to the base of the call stack. This is causing the test framework to misrepresent where the error is occurring. I'm looking in to fixing this, but there are several options on how this can be done using the new support I've added in. Does the framework make the test method being executed available somewhere? If I can determine the method being invoked, it will be a very simple matter to locate the stack frame of the appropriate method and extract a line number. Rick |
From: Mark M. <mie...@gm...> - 2009-08-07 12:46:38
|
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 7:24 AM, Rick McGuire<obj...@gm...> wrote: > One of the changes I put in recently extended the condition traceback > lines all the way to the base of the call stack. This is causing the > test framework to misrepresent where the error is occurring. I'm > looking in to fixing this, but there are several options on how this > can be done using the new support I've added in. Does the framework > make the test method being executed available somewhere? I see from your commits that you got this worked out. -- Mark Miesfeld |