Checkins and test passing
bulat.ziganshin at gmail.com
Mon Oct 23 06:32:47 EDT 2006
Monday, October 23, 2006, 1:57:38 PM, you wrote:
>> I think it would be a nice requirement that for a test to be marked as
>> expected-to-fail there must be an open bug about it.
> If the "expected/unexpected" terminology is confusing, then maybe it
> would be better to rename them to "desired/undesired" failures?
it seems that we need 3 classes :)
Bulat mailto:Bulat.Ziganshin at gmail.com
More information about the Cvs-ghc