On 6/3/14, 8:50 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
I do think we should be very intentional about adopting something new,
both in terms of semantics (mochitest is() using == is a mistake we
should not duplicate in the short-name comparison function in the new
setup) y
One other note.
The checkin so far preserved the assertion semantics in xpcshell,
afaict: failure throws and terminates the test.
I assume that the mochitest version will use a different reporter that
doesn't throw-and-terminate, to preserve the current semantics of
mochitest assertions. (If this assumption is incorrect, we need to have
a separate discussion about that.) If so, we'll have the same methods
but different semantics in the different harnesses. Not sure how much
of a problem that is in practice... not least because I don't think
people actually write xpcshell tests all that much.
-Boris
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
