Re: [cclib-devel] Jaguar parser errors

[Karol L. <kar...@kn...>]

On Wednesday 21 of February 2007 11:10, Noel O'Boyle wrote:
> The thing is, if we implicitly pass them, future generations of cclib
> developers may not be sure whether we just forgot to test it.

Conversely, if someone sees that a test is passed in the print-out  (as it is 
now with mocoeffs for Jaguar 4.2/6.5), they will assume that the test is 
actually done and passes - that's what happened in my case. It took me some 
time to figure out that the test method was explicitly overriden. So i would 
opt for either eliminating these tests and not printing anything about them 
(becuase, in fact, they are not done), or clearly noting in the test output 
that the particular test is NOT done and explcitly passed.

I think it is important to make the print-out very clear and not leaving any 
doubts about which tests are really done, but maybe that is something for 
after the upcoming release.

-- 
written by Karol Langner
Wed Feb 21 11:45:28 CET 2007