Mercurial > hg > xemacs-beta
changeset 3130:a7ef4b25b467
[xemacs-hg @ 2005-12-08 10:58:57 by stephent]
Tests for backward-up-list. <87oe3rg8l1.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
author | stephent |
---|---|
date | Thu, 08 Dec 2005 10:58:59 +0000 |
parents | 17d3297c6bad |
children | 0f34868678d4 |
files | tests/ChangeLog tests/automated/syntax-tests.el |
diffstat | 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) [+] |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- a/tests/ChangeLog Wed Dec 07 22:51:04 2005 +0000 +++ b/tests/ChangeLog Thu Dec 08 10:58:59 2005 +0000 @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@ +2005-12-08 Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@xemacs.org> + + * automated/syntax-tests.el (backward-up-list): New test. + Thanks to Zacjev Evgeny for report, Aidan Kehoe for reproduction. + 2005-10-26 Stephen J. Turnbull <stephen@xemacs.org> * XEmacs 21.5.23 "daikon" is released.
--- a/tests/automated/syntax-tests.el Wed Dec 07 22:51:04 2005 +0000 +++ b/tests/automated/syntax-tests.el Thu Dec 08 10:58:59 2005 +0000 @@ -150,3 +150,42 @@ ;; this last used to crash (parse-partial-sexp point (point-max))))) + +;; Test backward-up-list +;; Known-Bug: report = Evgeny Zacjev ca 2005-12-01, confirm = Aidan Kehoe + +(with-temp-buffer + ;; We are now using the standard syntax table. Thus there's no need to + ;; worry about a bogus syntax setting, eg, in a Gnus Article buffer the + ;; bug doesn't manifest. + + ;; value of point to the immediate left of this character + ;; 0 1 2 + ;; 1234 56789 012 34567 890 12 3456 7 + (insert "a ( \"b (c\" (\"defg\") \")\") h\n") + + ;; #### This test should check *every* position. + (flet ((backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to (start expected-end) + (goto-char start) + (backward-up-list 1) + (= (point) expected-end))) + (Known-Bug-Expect-Failure + ;; Evgeny's case + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 16 12))) + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 19 12)) + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 20 3)) + (Known-Bug-Expect-Failure + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 22 3))) + (Known-Bug-Expect-Failure + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 23 3))) + (Assert (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 24 3)) + ;; This is maybe a little tricky, since we don't expect the position + ;; check to happen -- so use an illegal expected position + ;; I don't think there's any other way for this to fail that way, + ;; barring hardware error.... + (Check-Error-Message syntax-error + "Unbalanced parentheses" + (backward-up-list-moves-point-from-to 25 nil)) + ;; special-case check that point didn't move + (Assert (= (point) 25)))) +