[webkit-dev] test_expectations.txt for non-chromium ports

Maciej Stachowiak mjs at apple.com
Mon Feb 13 18:52:20 PST 2012

On Feb 13, 2012, at 6:47 PM, Ryosuke Niwa wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Stephen White <senorblanco at chromium.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs at apple.com> wrote:
> I don't know about other organizations, but from Apple's point of view, it's rare that we'd want to publicly promise that we'll never implement something. We'd just want to document that we haven't implemented the feature yet, and thus some tests are inapplicable. So NEVERFIX would be something we'd be even more reluctant to apply. We would not even want to mark the difference between "we haven't enabled this feature yet, but probably will very soon" and "we have no plans to ever implement the feature unless something changes", as that would be communicating information about future releases.
> I don't know of the intent of SKIP, but maybe it is ok for this purpose. I would expect it to be used for tests that are temporarily skipped due to bugs, based on the name, which seems different to me from "this functionality is not implemented in this port, rendering the test inapplicable".
> How about NOTIMPL?
> Let's not use an arbitrary abbreviation like IMPL. I would strictly prefer NOTIMPLEMENTED or NOT_IMPLEMENTED or NotImplemented over NOTIMPL, NOT_IMPL, or NotImpl.

NOT_IMPLEMENTED, or something similar like FEATURE_MISSING, might be good.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/attachments/20120213/7e931318/attachment.html>

More information about the webkit-dev mailing list