|
»
»
»
»
« Return to Thread: 8 Unit Tests Broken
Re: 8 Unit Tests Broken
by Adrian Cumiskey
::
Rate this Message:
The following test still fails as part of the LayoutEngineTestSuite :-
wrapper_block.xml Error Expected w=14400 at position 0 but got: 0 (element-list category=breaker)
java.lang.RuntimeException: Expected w=14400 at position 0 but got: 0 (element-list category=breaker)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.ElementListCheck.fail(ElementListCheck.java:222)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.ElementListCheck.check(ElementListCheck.java:87)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTester.checkAll(LayoutEngineTester.java:235)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTester.runTest(LayoutEngineTester.java:182)
at
org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestSuite$LayoutEngineTestCase.testMain(LayoutEngineTestSuite.java:219)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestSuite$1.runTest(LayoutEngineTestSuite.java:193)
Adrian.
Andreas Delmelle wrote:
> On May 13, 2008, at 12:20, Andreas Delmelle wrote:
>> On May 13, 2008, at 11:59, Andreas Delmelle wrote:
>>>>
>>>> background-position-shorthand-test.fo Error
>>>> file:/home/acumiskey/workspace/tru/test/fotree/testcases/background-position-shorthand-test.fo
>>>> Property 'background-position-vertical' expected to evaluate to
>>>> '0mpt' but got '0.0%' (test:assert in fo:block at line #53, column #79)
>>>>
>>>> java.lang.IllegalStateException:
>>>> file:/home/acumiskey/workspace/tru/test/fotree/testcases/background-position-shorthand-test.fo
>>>>
>>>> Property 'background-position-vertical' expected to evaluate to
>>>> '0mpt' but got '0.0%'
>>>> (test:assert in fo:block at line #53, column #79)
>>>
>>>
>>> This one, I'm not sure, yet. Needs further investigation... I'll get
>>> back on this one.
>>
>> Must have something to do with caching CommonBorderPaddingBackground.
>> No idea why it is suddenly using 0%. This should (obviously) resolve
>> to a FixedLength of 0mpt...
>
> Decided to force the default zero value for both properties (and the
> shorthand) to absolute lengths (0pt) instead of percentages (0%). This
> makes the test pass again, and should be better for memory-consumption.
>
> So, trunk should be stable again.
>
> Apologies for the inconvenience.
>
> Cheers
>
> Andreas
>
wrapper_block.xml Error Expected w=14400 at position 0 but got: 0 (element-list category=breaker)
java.lang.RuntimeException: Expected w=14400 at position 0 but got: 0 (element-list category=breaker)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.ElementListCheck.fail(ElementListCheck.java:222)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.ElementListCheck.check(ElementListCheck.java:87)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTester.checkAll(LayoutEngineTester.java:235)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTester.runTest(LayoutEngineTester.java:182)
at
org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestSuite$LayoutEngineTestCase.testMain(LayoutEngineTestSuite.java:219)
at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestSuite$1.runTest(LayoutEngineTestSuite.java:193)
Adrian.
Andreas Delmelle wrote:
> On May 13, 2008, at 12:20, Andreas Delmelle wrote:
>> On May 13, 2008, at 11:59, Andreas Delmelle wrote:
>>>>
>>>> background-position-shorthand-test.fo Error
>>>> file:/home/acumiskey/workspace/tru/test/fotree/testcases/background-position-shorthand-test.fo
>>>> Property 'background-position-vertical' expected to evaluate to
>>>> '0mpt' but got '0.0%' (test:assert in fo:block at line #53, column #79)
>>>>
>>>> java.lang.IllegalStateException:
>>>> file:/home/acumiskey/workspace/tru/test/fotree/testcases/background-position-shorthand-test.fo
>>>>
>>>> Property 'background-position-vertical' expected to evaluate to
>>>> '0mpt' but got '0.0%'
>>>> (test:assert in fo:block at line #53, column #79)
>>>
>>>
>>> This one, I'm not sure, yet. Needs further investigation... I'll get
>>> back on this one.
>>
>> Must have something to do with caching CommonBorderPaddingBackground.
>> No idea why it is suddenly using 0%. This should (obviously) resolve
>> to a FixedLength of 0mpt...
>
> Decided to force the default zero value for both properties (and the
> shorthand) to absolute lengths (0pt) instead of percentages (0%). This
> makes the test pass again, and should be better for memory-consumption.
>
> So, trunk should be stable again.
>
> Apologies for the inconvenience.
>
> Cheers
>
> Andreas
>
« Return to Thread: 8 Unit Tests Broken
| Free Forum Powered by Nabble | Forum Help |