Though we still haven't had a regression report posted here since 0.123.

Success rate up and down again from 86.7% through 88.0%, 87.8% and 87.7% to 87.9%.
Stability rate up from 98.1% through 98.6%, 98.5% and 97.9% to 98.8%.

http://smjg.port5.com/pr/d/dstress.xls
http://dstress.kuehne.cn/www/results.html

While we're talking about DStress....

Why are abstract_01 to 04 nocompile?  Nothing in the spec (that I can find) indicates that abstract methods shouldn't be allowed to have contracts.  And the fact that contracts are supposed to be inherited would imply that they might be allowed.  Really, these four should be filed as undefined.

For that matter, what happened to the undefined testcases that were put in the other day?  The word 'undefined' is completely absent from the results page.

Another one that should be undefined is array_initialization_02, along with 17_A to C (maybe others in that area).  Because the spec contradicts itself on whether this is valid.

http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?DocComments/Arrays#Contradiction

Stewart.

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox.  Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Stewart Gordon schrieb am Wed, 22 Jun 2005 11:09:34 +0100:
> Though we still haven't had a regression report posted here since 0.123.

I'm simply to busy right now. GDC 0.12-0.14 and about 80 bug reports are still missing :(

> Why are abstract_01 to 04 nocompile?  Nothing in the spec (that I can find) indicates that abstract methods shouldn't be allowed to have contracts.  And the fact that contracts are supposed to be inherited would imply that they might be allowed.  Really, these four should be filed as undefined.
>
> For that matter, what happened to the undefined testcases that were put in the other day?  The word 'undefined' is completely absent from the results page.
>
> Another one that should be undefined is array_initialization_02, along with 17_A to C (maybe others in that area).  Because the spec contradicts itself on whether this is valid.

I'll have a look.

Thomas


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iD8DBQFCujWk3w+/yD4P9tIRAmf4AKCXg6xwnuHTRvAjenFoTp9lJvqfDgCghoBI
CJvYuDYgHlfpQS7EVFVuDvk=
=/gp6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----