Hi Frank,
Looks good. With regard to a test being too simple or straightforward,
it can be subjective. I mean, what are easy to the author/you may not
for others who don't have the knowledge on the particular subject
matter. So it's always good to leave comments when you are there. It's
also helpful for the author/you to remember what's done and why should
you revisit them.
Cheers,
Joe
On 4/2/2015 8:30 PM, Frank Yuan wrote:
Hi Joe
Thank you for your comments, I have updated at
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~fyuan/8051559/webrev.02/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Efyuan/8051559/webrev.02/>
Please also check my comments in line below
Best Regards
Frank
*From:*huizhe wang [mailto:huizhe.w...@oracle.com]
*Sent:* Friday, April 03, 2015 10:02 AM
*To:* Frank Yuan
*Cc:* 'Lance Andersen'; 'Core-Libs-Dev'; 'Gustavo Galimberti'
*Subject:* Re: Review request for JDK-8051559: JAXP function dom tests
conversion
DocumentTest->testCreateElementNeg, the conversion seems to be
incorrect. The original test, as the Javadoc stated, "This checks for
the constuctor of DOMException ". The new test however, only verifies
that an Exception is thrown.
//I moved a part of original DomExcpTestas testCreateElementNeg into
DocumentTest, and write some code for DOMException, but as you known,
class DOMException is so simple, JCK test has covered what I/original
DomExcpTest test, Shura suggested me to remove this test from ours,
then I did as his comment.
Comments for tests such as testCreateAttributeNSNeg can be more
descriptive, for example, "Test for createAttributeNS method: verifies
that DOMException is thrown if reserved prefixes are used with an
arbitrary namespace name."
//Modified the comments to be more descriptive as your example on the
similar cases.
The original tests that made up DocumentTypeTest had comments that you
may want to copy over or rewrite as you did other tests.
//Because I thought this test is so straightforward, I didn't add
comment for it. However, I added comments as your suggestion.
The comment for EntityChildTest can be "Test DOM Parser: parsing an
xml file that contains external entities."
//changed the comment
NodeListTest: @summary Verifies a bug found in jaxp1.0.1 and 1.1FCS.
After going out of bound, the last element of a NodeList returns null.
The bug has been fixed in jaxp 1.1.1 build.
//changed the comment
Thanks,
Joe
On 4/1/2015 4:01 AM, Frank Yuan wrote:
Hi Joe and Lance
Many thanks for your review and comments!
I have added the comments to the tests as your suggestions except
some test method is very simple, the method name/code can present
all information, e.g. method testHasFeature in
DomImplementationTest.java. Please check my update in
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~fyuan/8051559/webrev.01/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Efyuan/8051559/webrev.01/>
As well, I understand your suggestion about the code comment, I
will think about how to add the comment on the viewpoint of the
other code reader in my future work, thank you!
Best Regards
Frank
*From:*huizhe wang [mailto:huizhe.w...@oracle.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, April 01, 2015 1:14 PM
*To:* Lance Andersen
*Cc:* Frank Yuan; Core-Libs-Dev; Gustavo Galimberti
*Subject:* Re: Review request for JDK-8051559: JAXP function dom
tests conversion
Hi Frank,
I did see the request, just didn't have time to look at it.
I again agree with Lance, that these tests were written over 10
years ago, it would be valuable to write down whatever
understanding you gained while converting the tests, same as the
Astro application/test, the goal of each test and how it works
would all be helpful. Basically, it would be nice to add some
comment on @Test.
I tried the tests. They worked fine with my current build (with
some changes).
Thanks,
Joe
On 3/31/2015 7:10 AM, Lance Andersen wrote:
Hi Frank
On Mar 31, 2015, at 7:24 AM, Lance @ Oracle
<lance.ander...@oracle.com <mailto:lance.ander...@oracle.com>>
wrote:
Hi frank
Can you forward the other review request as I think I
thought they were the same and deleted it
Ignore this comment, the subjects were too similar but this is
what needed reviewed.
I will look at this again today
The tests overall look fine.
I still have the same comment WRT providing a simple comment
describing each test. The key point to remember is we want to
make it easier for someone to look at the test, understand
what you are trying to validate, and understand the coverage
of the tests. This will help future maintainers of the code.
Comments are just as important in test code as it is in
implementation IMHO.
Best
Lance
Best
Lance
<http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>Lance
Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff |
+1.781.442.2037 <tel:+1.781.442.2037>
Oracle Java Engineering
1 Network Drive <x-apple-data-detectors://34/0>
Burlington, MA 01803 <x-apple-data-detectors://34/0>
lance.ander...@oracle.com <mailto:lance.ander...@oracle.com>
Sent from my iPad
On Mar 31, 2015, at 4:15 AM, Frank Yuan
<frank.y...@oracle.com <mailto:frank.y...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Joe
Do you have any comment for dom suite co-location?
Best Regards
Frank
From: Frank Yuan [mailto:frank.y...@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 5:46 PM
To: 'huizhe wang'; 'Core-Libs-Dev'
Cc: 'jibing chen'; 'Gustavo Galimberti';
sandeep.konch...@oracle.com
<mailto:sandeep.konch...@oracle.com>;
'Alexandre (Shura) Iline'
Subject: RE: Review request for JDK-8051559: JAXP
function dom tests
conversion
Hi, Joe and All
We are working on moving internal jaxp functional
tests to open jdk repo.
This is the dom suite. Would you please review these
test? Any comment will
be appreciated.
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8051559
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~fyuan/8051559/webrev.00/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Efyuan/8051559/webrev.00/>
Thanks,
Frank
<http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>
<http://oracle.com/us/design/oracle-email-sig-198324.gif>Lance
Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
Oracle Java Engineering
1 Network Drive
Burlington, MA 01803
lance.ander...@oracle.com <mailto:lance.ander...@oracle.com>
