That's great, thanks Sveta. Yes, I think this is definitely
something to
add to the main
website eventually - a full set of instructions (expanding the current
links to mail
archives into their complete command lines etc.) would be really useful
for any
first time Harmony developer (and some of us longer lived ones ;) )
Regards,
Oliver
Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:
> I've just created the "Running the Classlib Tests" page [1], so
that you
> could share your experience there :)
>
> In the future we could add this stuff to the web-site, let's say,
to the
> testing page [2], where certain package-specific conventions are
> proposed, but nothing is said about JUnit tests.
> What do you think?
>
> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/RunningTheClasslibTests
> [2] http://harmony.apache.org/subcomponents/classlibrary/testing.html
>
> Best regards,
> Sveta
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 4:32 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [general] JUnit consistency, practices
>
> +1
>
> Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:
>
>> IMHO we can start collecting info about running the classlib tests.
>> I suggest to create a new wiki page, let's say, "Running The
Classlib
>> Tests" and add a link to it front the wiki front page > components >
>> class library.
>> ASA we get the clear picture of this issue and verify all the
ways to
>> run tests, we'll be able to post this info on the web-site.
>> Want do you think?
>> I'd be glad to help.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Sveta
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alexei Zakharov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2006 5:25 PM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: [general] JUnit consistency, practices
>>
>> +1 for having the doc. But personally I don't know the way how to
run
>> tests from the particular test class (not to speak of individual
test
>> methods) using the current build system. So I don't really know what
>> exactly should be copy/pasted. Or you was talking about by-hand
test
>> invocation cmd mentioned above?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> 2006/12/5, Tony Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>> Agree! When I tried harmony on some applications, I found it is
very
>>> hard to run the test of application mainly because there is no
>>> instruction for that at all. So I think it is also not very easy
for
>>> user who have interest to run tests of harmony. And a good
>>>
> instruction
>
>>> may be good for having many user's help to run harmony tests on
>>> various platforms.
>>>
>>> On 12/4/06, Oliver Deakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Perhaps some kind of "How To Run The Classlib Tests" section on
>>>> the website would be useful? (Assuming there isn't already one
with
>>>> this information in) Then none of us would have to remember - it
>>>> would be right there to copy/paste :)
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Oliver
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ivan Popov wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Alexei,
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree that it is still possible to run JUnit tests from command
>>>>>
>> line
>>
>>>>> even without having main() in the code. But I think it is easier
>>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>>> run test by convenient way
>>>>>
>>>>> $ java -cp junit.jar TestClass
>>>>>
>>>>> rather than in a more complex manner
>>>>>
>>>>> $ java -cp junit.jar junit.textui.TestRunner TestClass
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, I constantly forget the right spelling of the full
class
>>>>> name for TestRunner class and have to look into JUnit doc to
>>>>>
>> specify
>>
>>>>> proper name for such a command line. Also, it would be
>>>>>
>> inconvenient if
>>
>>>>> someone runs test from an IDE that does not support JUnit
>>>>>
>> environment,
>>
>>>>> but launches test as a usual Java application.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't insist on adding main() to each JUnit testcase, but I see
>>>>>
>> no
>>
>>>>> reason for removing this functionality from those test where it
>>>>> already exists.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/29/06, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ivan, Stepan,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I personally set +1 for removing main() method. Any script or
>>>>>>
>> command
>>
>>>>>> line can be trivially modified to launch JUnit tests without
>>>>>>
>> main()
>>
>>>>>> method: one should just add junit.textui.TestRunner class before
>>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>> test class name.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> $ java -cp junit.jar junit.textui.TestRunner TestClass
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm writing this trivial thing here because during our work on
>>>>>>
>> class
>>
>>>>>> library test enabling it was FAQ N1 for all C/C++ developers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note, any JUnit test won't work without junit.jar anyway. If you
>>>>>>
>> have
>>
>>>>>> junit.jar, you have a standard test runner, which is also quite
>>>>>> lightweight.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>> Alexei
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 11/29/06, Ivan Popov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -1 for removing main().
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I often run individual tests from command line or using scripts
>>>>>>>
>> and
>>
>>>>>>> it's easier to launch them as a usual Java application. Also,
>>>>>>>
>> this
>>
>>>>>>> facilitates creating separate bundle with test to attach to a
>>>>>>>
>> bug
>>
>>>>>>> report or send to other people, who can just run it from
>>>>>>>
>> command line
>>
>>>>>>> or use script with the all required options already specified,
>>>>>>>
>> instead
>>
>>>>>>> of setting IDE for this test.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 11/29/06, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is a large amount of inconsistency across the tests and
>>>>>>>>
>> I'd
>>
>>>>>> like
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> to lobby for cleaning them up as much as possible. I'm of the
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> opinion
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> that test code should be clean, simple and transparent. Here
>>>>>>>>
>> are
>>
>>>>>> some
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> of the more noticeable items that I'd like to cleanup.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * Empty setUp/teardown methods - There are a number of tests
>>>>>>>>
>> that
>>
>>>>>>>> override setUp and/or teardown methods, but are either empty
>>>>>>>>
>> or just
>>
>>>>>>>> call the super implementation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * Singleton suite methods - There are some tests that contain
>>>>>>>>
>> a
>>
>>>>>> static
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "suite" method that creates a TestSuite and adds one test
>>>>>>>>
>> (the test
>>
>>>>>>>> class it's declared in). Are there any practical uses for
>>>>>>>>
>> these
>>
>>>>>>>> methods? TestSuites are for grouping together tests to treat
>>>>>>>>
>> them as
>>
>>>>>>>> one unit. Since these suites are just one test, it doesn't
>>>>>>>>
>> seem to
>>
>>>>>>>> provide much value.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * main method launching text runner - There are some tests
>>>>>>>>
>> that
>>
>>>>>>>> contain "main" methods which run the enclosing test via a
>>>>>>>>
>> JUnit text
>>
>>>>>>>> runner. Most IDEs have built-in support for JUnit and can
>>>>>>>>
>> launch any
>>
>>>>>>>> test arbitrarily and Ant can do the same thing. Does anyone
>>>>>>>>
>> launch
>>
>>>>>>>> tests via these methods?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My proposal would be to clean up these inconsistencies by
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> eliminating
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> them, but what does everyone else think?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Nathan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Oliver Deakin
>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Tony Wu
>>> China Software Development Lab, IBM
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
--
Oliver Deakin
IBM United Kingdom Limited
