On Sunday 01 April 2007 16:58, Jurko Gospodnetić wrote:
>    Hi.
> 
>    I think I just tracked down some bugs in the Boost.Build unit testing 
> framework causing it to pass tests when it should not.
> 
>    Since the milestone 11 release some sort of regular expression 
> support was added, most likely to allow the tests to work no matter the 
> exact target folders Boost.Build creates based on its feature values.
> 
>    Both bugs are located in the BoostBuild.jam module and unfortunately 
> I am not yet comfortable enough with either Python, Boost.Build or the 
> testing framework used to fix them by myself. 
> 
>    Bug 1.
>    ------
> 
>    Tester.expect_nothing() tests directly whether the given filename 
> which may be a regular expression is contained inside a specific 
> filename collection which never contains regular expressions and fails 
> if it does. This means that expect_nothing tests will never fail as they 
> never fail for filenames specified as regular expressions and the 
> Tester.adjust_names() function always returns a regular expression filename.
> 
>    Bug 2.
>    ------
> 
>    Tester.expect_addition(), Tester.expect_removal() and 
> Tester.expect_touch() tests never fail as their glob_remove() calls do 
> not throw an exception when they do not find targets. The glob_remove() 
> function seems to be a replacement for the old remove() calls that threw 
> an exception if their target could not be found. To fix this simple 
> throw an exception from glob_remove() in case it does not find any 
> elements to remove.

Ouch! Rene, I think regexps in filename is your change. Do you have
an opinion what fix is right?

> 
>    Bug 3.
>    ------
> 
>    Tester::expect_modification() always fails as it uses the old 
> remove() call instead of the new glob_remove() call to test whether a 
> regular expression filename can be located and removed from a collection 
> not containing only non-regular expression filenames.

Likewise, Rene, do you have an opinion here?

If I understand correctly, regexp based matching was introduced just
so that you don't need to explicitly pass the right toolset name to
tests. Do you think that's still needed?

> P.S.
>    Can anyone suggest a good Python IDE for Windows? I can't seem to 
> find one to debug in easily...  I'd like to work on this but my 
> current tool chain makes this quite painful. ))

I'm not using any IDE, I just put print statements in python code 

- Volodya
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-build