Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure
Aristotle Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@gmx.de> Mon, 02 February 2009 05:21 UTC
Return-Path: <tap-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: tap-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tap-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6057F3A6822; Sun, 1 Feb 2009 21:21:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: tap@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tap@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DB643A6924 for <tap@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Feb 2009 21:21:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.333
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.333 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.266, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sw5U2HrCAUZ3 for <tap@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 1 Feb 2009 21:21:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F2C1E3A6822 for <tap@ietf.org>; Sun, 1 Feb 2009 21:21:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 02 Feb 2009 05:20:40 -0000
Received: from static-87-79-236-202.netcologne.de (EHLO klangraum) [87.79.236.202] by mail.gmx.net (mp026) with SMTP; 02 Feb 2009 06:20:40 +0100
X-Authenticated: #163624
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18Zw1MAp+gZN+o2wkwOqD5OXWelYTItGfvlEkaP2k dWbsMa7GWDdqEA
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 06:20:27 +0100
From: Aristotle Pagaltzis <pagaltzis@gmx.de>
To: tap@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20090202052027.GA12868@klangraum.plasmasturm.org>
Mail-Followup-To: tap@ietf.org
References: <4984B200.6060907@pobox.com> <439925.21633.qm@web65707.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <439925.21633.qm@web65707.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
X-FuHaFi: 0.71
Subject: Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure
X-BeenThere: tap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Test Anything Protocol WG discussions <tap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap>, <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/tap>
List-Post: <mailto:tap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap>, <mailto:tap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Sender: tap-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tap-bounces@ietf.org
* Ovid <publiustemp-tapx@yahoo.com> [2009-02-01 14:40]: > Your arguments made sense, but I have a question: what does > 'not ok 4 # SKIP' even mean? To my mind, that's a parse error > because something has gone horribly wrong or the person writing > the TAP producer is terribly confused. You seem to have parsed it successfully far enough to discover a contradiction in its meaning. In this way it seems to me that `not ok 4 # SKIP` is different from `os9aso2kk2100#asz`, which doesn’t mean anything at all. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/> _______________________________________________ tap mailing list tap@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tap
- [tap] Parse error vs failure Michael G Schwern
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Aristotle Pagaltzis
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure David E. Wheeler
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Michael Peters
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Steffen Schwigon
- Re: [tap] [offlist] Re: Parse error vs failure Aristotle Pagaltzis
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Ovid
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Steffen Schwigon
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Aristotle Pagaltzis
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Andy Armstrong
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Andy Armstrong
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Michael G Schwern
- Re: [tap] Parse error vs failure Steffen Schwigon