New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Skipped tests about number of evaluation of lhs and rhs for flipflop operators in S03-operators/flip-flop.t #3867
Comments
From @usev6This ticket is about two currently skipped tests in The tests in question check how often the left hand side (lhs) and # make sure {lhs,rhs} isn't evaluated when state is {true,false} # keep track of # of times lhs and rhs are EVAL'd by adding for @a { $code.({$lhs_run++; ?$lhs}, {$rhs_run++; ?$rhs}); } return [$lhs_run, $rhs_run]; is-deeply ff_eval({@_[0]() ff @_[1]()}, /B/, /B/, <A B A B A>), is-deeply ff_eval({@_[0]() fff @_[1]()}, /B/, /B/, <A B A B A>), Currently, the second test passes, but the first fails because the sub * S03 states: "The two sides of a flipflop are evaluated as smartmatches That's in line with current behaviour. * http://doc.perl6.org/routine/ff states: "Compares both arguments to That's also in line with current behaviour. # Evaluate LHS and RHS. Note that in one-only mode, we use All in all, I think the first tests is wrong and should be changed. |
1 similar comment
From @usev6This ticket is about two currently skipped tests in The tests in question check how often the left hand side (lhs) and # make sure {lhs,rhs} isn't evaluated when state is {true,false} # keep track of # of times lhs and rhs are EVAL'd by adding for @a { $code.({$lhs_run++; ?$lhs}, {$rhs_run++; ?$rhs}); } return [$lhs_run, $rhs_run]; is-deeply ff_eval({@_[0]() ff @_[1]()}, /B/, /B/, <A B A B A>), is-deeply ff_eval({@_[0]() fff @_[1]()}, /B/, /B/, <A B A B A>), Currently, the second test passes, but the first fails because the sub * S03 states: "The two sides of a flipflop are evaluated as smartmatches That's in line with current behaviour. * http://doc.perl6.org/routine/ff states: "Compares both arguments to That's also in line with current behaviour. # Evaluate LHS and RHS. Note that in one-only mode, we use All in all, I think the first tests is wrong and should be changed. |
@usev6 - Status changed from 'new' to 'open' |
Migrated from rt.perl.org#124548 (status was 'open')
Searchable as RT124548$
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: