Hi Devs, I replaced the existing test with Milinda's version after reading through it.
Regards, Senaka > Hi Milinda, > > I believe your version sounds better than the existing one. If so, why > don't you commit it? I fixed up the duration test, and also fixed some > bugs in the duration code. I believe if our devs could take an issue (a > test I mean) at a time and fix it, it is not going to be a great deal of > work. > > Regards, > Senaka > > On Tue, 2008-02-05 at 15:54 +0530, Milinda Pathirage wrote: > Hi, >> I have correct some mistakes in date time test and added some small > things. Here I have attached the my version of date time test. It's > better if you can analyze it and comment on the implementation. Then we > can identify proper way to write test cases for current utility > implementations. Also I think it's better if we create a wiki page to > track the progress of these test cases. Then anyone can contribute to > design of these test cases. >> >> Thanks >> Milinda >> >> On Feb 5, 2008 2:13 PM, Dushshantha Chandradasa > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi Milinda and All, >> >> Thank you very much for your valuable comment. The main > intension behind writing these unit test cases is to improve > the the test coverage of our code base. Its really important to > have unit tests not only to increase the code coverage > percentage, but also to keep the code bug free. Since we didn't > maintain a good set of unit tests from the beginning , Manoj is > helping us writing few test cases beginning from the areas that > we never had unit tests before. >> >> Writing unit test cases for existing code written by somebody > else is bit difficult. The good practice here is writing those > while the developer writing the code. So I suggest all of us > that we'll polish the new test cases up, to do a better job and > make a habit of adding few unit tests for the changes you are > doing to code. These good practices help us to keep our code in > a high quality. >> >> Thanks, >> Dushshantha >> >> >> >> >> On Feb 4, 2008 9:13 PM, Milinda Pathirage > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> >> First of all I have to say that it's a good idea (tests > for utils). I analyze some of the test cases and found > out that they were not correctly implemented according > to my knowledge. I think we have to figure out why we > need those test cases and what we are going to test > using that test cases. Looking at these implementations, > I think no one can get any idea what they are stands for > (but the name says what is going to test). So, I think > we have to first identify what are we going to test and > how we going to test them . Then we can clearly design > some test case that correctly check our implementations > for correctness. Followings things are some mistakes I > found out in implementations under allocator test, and > date time test. I didn't look into much about other > tests but I think they also have same problems. >> >> >> When I first look at directory called allocator, I think > it contains test cases for our env->allocator. But what > is inside is test for fread and fwrite functions and > function called test_base64() which contains some > axutil_base64_binary_t creation function calls and > getter and setter methods of it. Also some unwanted > usage of global variables. Also axutil_env_t structure > creations are wrong. One axutil_env_creation is inside > the main method. It assigned created environment to > global variable called env and inside function > implementation another environment creation function is > called and again assigned the return value to the same > global variable. >> >> >> Inside date time test some mistakes that I have > mentioned above also visible and the date time string > use to test has wrong format. >> axis2_char_t * date_time_str = "2000-11-11 12:30:24"; >> I don't know whether it was used intentionally. But it > must have following format. >> "2002-11-11T12:30:24" >> >> >> So I think we have to look at these tests seriously and > design these tests to test what we exactly want to test. > Please feel free to comment on this. >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Milinda >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> http://inf-dimensions.blogspot.com "Infinite Dimensions" >> http://think2ed.blogspot.com "thinksquared" >> http://wsaxc.blogspot.com "Web Services With Axis2/C" >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> http://think2ed.blogspot.com "thinksquared" >> http://wsaxc.blogspot.com "Web Services With Axis2/C" >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
