On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 15:21:04 GMT, Lance Andersen <lan...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> High level comment: these days we usually try to use junit 5 / jupiter >>> instead of TestNG. >> >> I think my choice of testNG here might have been influenced by other ZIP >> area tests using testNG. I guess a rewrite to junit should be pretty >> straightforward. >> >> @LanceAndersen Do you have any opinion on junit/testNG for tests like this? > >> > High level comment: these days we usually try to use junit 5 / jupiter >> > instead of TestNG. >> >> I think my choice of testNG here might have been influenced by other ZIP >> area tests using testNG. I guess a rewrite to junit should be pretty >> straightforward. >> >> @LanceAndersen Do you have any opinion on junit/testNG for tests like this? > > We have had some discussion about using junit vs testNG but we have not > mandated it so I am OK with either but certainly if you would like to move to > junit as it should be fairly straight forward for this test, I think that > would be nice > > @LanceAndersen Do you have any opinion on junit/testNG for tests like this? > > Here's a junit version for consideration: > > https://github.com/eirbjo/jdk/blob/corrupted-zip-files-ng-junit/test/jdk/java/util/zip/ZipFile/CorruptedZipFiles.java Let's go with reviewing this version, Thank you for the update Eirik ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12563#issuecomment-1488838303
