On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2017-11-15 11:08 GMT+01:00 Guillermo Polito <guillermopol...@gmail.com>: >> >> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 11:06 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisi...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> 2017-11-15 11:00 GMT+01:00 Guillermo Polito <guillermopol...@gmail.com>: >>> >>>> And just putting it back to gray? As "not run"? >>>> >>> >>> We can implement any logic. >>> Personally I need current behaviour. >>> >> >> But it is not about you personally. It is about implementing the most >> common and the less strange for newcomers. >> > > To know what is the most common case people should tell personal opinion. > And in this thread only Richard was against current logic. > But you're assuming here that: - people that is not reading this email do not care and don't have a say - so pleople that is not subscribed to the mailing list don't care - and that includes newbies Our role of experienced guys it not only look after "our" best defaults. But also after the defaults of people without experience. I think that setting the button back to gray is a good behaviour. - it is the same thing that happens once you modify a method (which is what is happening during debugging) - it explicitly says "please rerun the test because you may have introduced side effects" Unless you make the debugger more intelligent, you cannot be sure that the result you obtained at the end of the test is really reproducible. And moreover, to be able to make such assumption you should be an expert that understands how the underlying framework behaves. > > >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Denis Kudriashov < >>>> dionisi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 2017-11-15 1:49 GMT+01:00 Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com>: >>>>> >>>>>> Ben Coman wrote >>>>>> > Or it could go to Amber, half-way between green & red to mean >>>>>> probably >>>>>> > correct. >>>>>> >>>>>> Ha ha. >>>>>> >>>>>> Again, it seems that just automatically rerunning the test >>>>>> immediately after >>>>>> a human-manipulated run and setting the color based on that second run >>>>>> addresses all points on both sides, no? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Except that sometimes we are debugging slow test and running it second >>>>> time automatically after "proceed" can be not appropriate. >>>>> We are talking about single test run. If user have any doubts about >>>>> result It is his responsibility to rerun the test. User knows what he is >>>>> doing when he debug and fix the test. No intelligence is required here. >>>>> >>>>> And anyway current fix just provides consistent behaviour to debugging >>>>> from explicit breakpoint/halt. In that case the result was always in sync >>>>> with debug session. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Sean >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Guille Polito >>>> >>>> Research Engineer >>>> >>>> Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille >>>> >>>> CRIStAL - UMR 9189 >>>> >>>> French National Center for Scientific Research - *http://www.cnrs.fr >>>> <http://www.cnrs.fr>* >>>> >>>> >>>> *Web:* *http://guillep.github.io* <http://guillep.github.io> >>>> >>>> *Phone: *+33 06 52 70 66 13 <+33%206%2052%2070%2066%2013> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> Guille Polito >> >> Research Engineer >> >> Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille >> >> CRIStAL - UMR 9189 >> >> French National Center for Scientific Research - *http://www.cnrs.fr >> <http://www.cnrs.fr>* >> >> >> *Web:* *http://guillep.github.io* <http://guillep.github.io> >> >> *Phone: *+33 06 52 70 66 13 <+33%206%2052%2070%2066%2013> >> > > -- Guille Polito Research Engineer Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille CRIStAL - UMR 9189 French National Center for Scientific Research - *http://www.cnrs.fr <http://www.cnrs.fr>* *Web:* *http://guillep.github.io* <http://guillep.github.io> *Phone: *+33 06 52 70 66 13
