-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 963
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
Test case improvements and updates #2393
Merged
Eideren
merged 21 commits into
stride3d:master
from
dloe:Test-Case-Improvements-and-updates
Nov 10, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
21 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c40073b
TestHalf2 and TestHalf now can pass in suite
dloe d9dc31a
Added similar prints for Half3 and Half4, added comments on Converter
dloe 46ad9cb
LifeTimeNoSimpleConstructor now passes
dloe 6162014
RenderToWindow test now skips due to failure
dloe dc984b5
Various Graphics Tests Using outdated images [DONT USE]
dloe ac0a968
TEstGCHandleAlloc: Autolayout was set to fail when it does now in fac…
dloe 54e0570
Stride Particles Tests Updated Visual Tests
dloe 125d491
Updated TestGetFontInfo to now properly check if various Font Info is…
dloe d598082
Added skips for graphics related tests to avoid confusion and give ad…
dloe 51c887b
Updated template package names to now be properly loaded
dloe b29156d
Revert "Stride Particles Tests Updated Visual Tests"
dloe 8995c41
Revert "Various Graphics Tests Using outdated images [DONT USE]"
dloe 110a916
Added skips to GPU rendering related tests that will consecutively fail
dloe a8916ca
Merge branch 'master' into Test-Case-Improvements-and-updates
dloe 5ccd93b
Skipped 2 more rendering related test cases, cleaned comments
dloe 87c7bda
Revert "Added skips to GPU rendering related tests that will consecut…
dloe ac882ba
Revert "Added skips for graphics related tests to avoid confusion and…
dloe ee50b87
Removed changed tests back to original tests with more comments
dloe c488249
Revert "Updated template package names to now be properly loaded"
dloe bcd5d06
Removed Skips for rendering
dloe d2d3496
Removed LifetimeNoSimpleConstuctor test and unnecessary constructor
dloe File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's ask the author about this, hopefully he has time to get back to us regarding this line.
@ericwj do you remember why you introduced this specific assertion ? As far as I can tell empty autolayouts have always been pinnable ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh you pinged me a while ago. I must've completely missed the mention. Sorry about that @Eideren.
I'm pretty sure if it was part of the PR and got accepted, the test passed. And indeed it does on .NET Framework, which is the easiest for me to test without installing old .NET runtimes. It is very possible that it also passes on older .NET Core or .NET 5/6. But if it now doesn't pass and you adjusted it to that circumstance, it'll likely be fine.
It is testing behavior of the runtime and that appears to have changed sometime. It was convenient that this test returned false just to know that in some places nobody forgot to change struct layout from the default of auto, at least where pinning was attempted - I believe this could be the case in the animation infrastructure. I don't think there is any other impact of this change in behavior.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Coincidentally I come accross another situation where a test crashes and because of this here, I checked and it happens that it is 2024 when I learn that already on .NET 2.0 an unannotated struct is in fact layout sequential. I must've seen this so many times in ILSpy or wherever... Not knowledge active enough to not surprise me. Somehow I assumed it to be auto, probably when writing the above code. At least when I wrote the reply...