!wKNaTuhRJSXtjUVpfk:matrix.org

web-platform-tests

238 Members
The web-platform-tests testsuite and infrastructure - https://web-platform-tests.org9 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
24 Mar 2024
@sideshowbarker:matrix.orgsideshowbarker rather than wrapping the whole thing in one promise_test 13:03:23
25 Mar 2024
@domenicdenicola:matrix.orgDomenicWait this seems like it's working as intended? You're saying asssert_true(someElement), and someElement === true is false, so the assert is failing04:48:50
@domenicdenicola:matrix.orgDomenicI think you want instead assert_not_equals(someElement, null)04:49:07
@sideshowbarker:matrix.orgsideshowbarkerYeah I ended up kind of completely re-working it07:32:24
@sideshowbarker:matrix.orgsideshowbarkerhang on, I’ll paste it in07:32:34
@sideshowbarker:matrix.orgsideshowbarker
findStringInDetails = (id, contents) => {
    let t = async_test(`auto-expand on find-in-page match: ${id}`);
    document.body.insertAdjacentHTML("beforeend", `<details id=${id}>${contents}</details>`);
    let details = document.getElementById(id);
    details.ontoggle = t.step_func_done(function(e) {
        details.remove();
        assert_equals(e.newState, "open", `newState is “open”: ${id}`);
        assert_equals(e.oldState, "closed", `oldState was “closed”: ${id}`);
        assert_true(details.open, `details element is open: ${id}`);
    });
    testRunner.findInPage(id, []);
}
let target;
target = "details-simple"; findStringInDetails(target, target);
target = "details-in-p"; findStringInDetails(target, `<p>${target}</p>`);
target = "details-in-table"; findStringInDetails(target, `<table><tr><td>${target}</table>`);
target = "details-nested-simple"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details>${target}</details>`);
target = "details-nested-target-in-p"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details><p>${target}</p></details>`);
target = "details-nested-target-in-table"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details><table><tr><td>${target}</table></details>`);
07:33:36
@sideshowbarker:matrix.orgsideshowbarker *
findStringInDetails = (id, contents) => {
    let t = async_test(`auto-expand on find-in-page match: ${id}`);
    document.body.insertAdjacentHTML("beforeend", `<details id=${id}>${contents}</details>`);
    let details = document.getElementById(id);
    details.ontoggle = t.step_func_done(function(e) {
        details.remove();
        assert_equals(e.newState, "open", `newState is “open”: ${id}`);
        assert_equals(e.oldState, "closed", `oldState was “closed”: ${id}`);
        assert_true(details.open, `details element is open: ${id}`);
    });
    testRunner.findInPage(id, []);
}
let target;
target = "details-simple"; findStringInDetails(target, target);
target = "details-in-p"; findStringInDetails(target, `<p>${target}</p>`);
target = "details-in-table"; findStringInDetails(target, `<table><tr><td>${target}</table>`);
target = "details-nested-simple"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details>${target}</details>`);
target = "details-nested-target-in-p"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details><p>${target}</p></details>`);
target = "details-nested-target-in-table"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details><table><tr><td>${target}</table></details>`);

(you’ll need to scroll to see the full script)

07:34:23
@sideshowbarker:matrix.orgsideshowbarker *
findStringInDetails = (id, contents) => {
    let t = async_test(`auto-expand on find-in-page match: ${id}`);
    document.body.insertAdjacentHTML("beforeend", `<details id=${id}>${contents}</details>`);
    let details = document.getElementById(id);
    details.ontoggle = t.step_func_done(function(e) {
        details.remove();
        assert_equals(e.newState, "open", `newState is “open”: ${id}`);
        assert_equals(e.oldState, "closed", `oldState was “closed”: ${id}`);
        assert_true(details.open, `details element is open: ${id}`);
    });
    testRunner.findInPage(id, []);
}
let target;
target = "details-simple"; findStringInDetails(target, target);
target = "details-in-p"; findStringInDetails(target, `<p>${target}</p>`);
target = "details-in-table"; findStringInDetails(target, `<table><tr><td>${target}</table>`);
target = "details-nested-simple"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details>${target}</details>`);
target = "details-nested-target-in-p"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details><p>${target}</p></details>`);
target = "details-nested-target-in-table"; findStringInDetails(target, `<details><table><tr><td>${target}</table></details>`);

(you’ll need to scroll to see the full script — 19 lines)

07:34:41
@emeyer:igalia.comEric Meyer changed their display name from Eric Meyer to Eric Meyer (holiday 25-26 March).14:40:03
@gsnedders:mozilla.orgSam Sneddon [:gsnedders] changed their display name from Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders] to Sam Sneddon [:gsnedders] [OOO].17:07:27
26 Mar 2024
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler jgraham: I'm trying to split up some WebGPU CTS test runs in Firefox CI based on --skip-implementation-status and/or --backlog. After looking through the implementation of wptrunner, I think I've found some conflicting information I was hoping to clarify. 🧵 20:25:14
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler

The Test Metadata page's section for implementation-status states that the set of values permitted are:

One of the values implementing, not-implementing or default.

20:25:26
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler

Looking back through chat here, it seems that the backlog is a Mozilla-specific addition (and I presume unsupported was renamed to not-implementing). So, my guess is that the full set of values permitted for Mozilla's testing metadata is:

  • implementing: Something that is going to be implemented fully in an agent, but perhaps not yet?
  • not-implementing: Something that an agent does not intend to implement, usually in agent-specific metadata.
  • default: Something that is fully implemented in an agent.
  • backlog: Things that Firefox intends to ship…eventually.
20:25:35
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler …but the definition I've associated with default has a conflict; it seems? Test.implementation_status returns implementing, not default, as the seeming default value. 20:25:41
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGublerMy questions are these:20:25:45
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler
  • Is the above set of values and their definitions correct?
20:25:48
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler
  • Assuming the above, why is implementing used as the default, and not default? Is default an outdated status, maybe?
20:25:49
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler Huh, wptrunner doesn't seem to accept the default status in its --skip-implementation-status array, either. 🤔 20:30:07
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler * Huh, wptrunner doesn't seem to accept the default status in accepted values for --skip-implementation-status array, either. 🤔 20:30:17
@krosylight:mozilla.orgkrosylight changed their display name from krosylight | pto until 2024-03-26 to krosylight.23:21:08
27 Mar 2024
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler * Huh, wptrunner doesn't seem to include the default status in accepted values for --skip-implementation-status array, either. 🤔 02:22:29
@emeyer:igalia.comEric Meyer changed their display name from Eric Meyer (holiday 25-26 March) to Eric Meyer.12:01:55
@sagu:mozilla.orgSamson When passing --timeout-multiplier it should also multiply harness timeout, right? 12:08:03
@jgraham_:matrix.orgjgrahamYes12:59:44
@jgraham_:matrix.orgjgraham

So I think that the command line parsing is the only bit that actually validates the implementation-status values.

I also think you're correct that the docs are wrong to claim there's a "default" value; that should be "implementing", and "backlog" is missing.

15:07:51
@jgraham_:matrix.orgjgraham default just doesn't exist 15:08:17
@annevk:matrix.organnevk jgraham: could you r+ https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/pull/45350 so when there's no objections by next week I can merge it and the spec change? 15:47:02
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler

Okay, so, the actual set of values seems to be:

  • implementing: Anywhere from "is being implemented" to "we believe we have fully implemented this" for an agent; the intent is "yes please let's test this".
  • not-implementing: Agent is not planning on implementing this, please don't test it.
  • backlog: Seems like this shouldn't be Firefox-specific. Basically, it means, "we intend to implement this, but plz don't test it like implementing yet".

☝🏻 Sound fair?

16:01:52
@erichdongubler-mozilla:mozilla.orgErichDonGubler *

jgraham: Okay, so, the actual set of values seems to be:

  • implementing: Anywhere from "is being implemented" to "we believe we have fully implemented this" for an agent; the intent is "yes please let's test this".
  • not-implementing: Agent is not planning on implementing this, please don't test it.
  • backlog: Seems like this shouldn't be Firefox-specific. Basically, it means, "we intend to implement this, but plz don't test it like implementing yet".

☝🏻 Sound fair?

16:01:59
@annevk:matrix.organnevk jgraham: thanks, I guess I might also have to ask for admin merge when the time comes. Though maybe I should double check those CI results or try it again first... 16:26:34

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 6