On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Kevin Zhou<zhoukevi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Socket does operate on bytes using default encoding of platform. What about > the expected results? If we prepared them by bytes, which encoding should be > used? For example, If we used bytes in ASCII, it may be effective on windows > or linux. But we may need to convert it into EBCDIC for Z specific > platform.In addition, asserting with strings is more readable and > user-friendly. Cause we can easily know which parts of the string is > different.
You're assuming you start with Strings, which doesn't make sense to me. If the API works with bytes, then I'd send in an array of bytes[] and assert against those know values. Characters and text having nothing to do with this test, so why introduce it? Again - asserting with Strings isn't the only way to make the output more informative - that argument is not convincing to me. -Nathan > > On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Nathan Beyer <ndbe...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Kevin Zhou<zhoukevi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi Nathan, >> > In addition, as for the same character, it has platform-dependent value >> of >> > the corresponding byte. On Z, it doesn't support ASCII but adopts EBCDIC >> > encoding. For instance, the byte for a new line on Z is 0x15 while 0x0A >> on >> > Windows or Linux. If we use assertions by byte values, we may need >> conduct >> > some encoding conversions before asserts. By comparison, asserting with >> > strings is preferred. >> >> I thought Sockets operated on bytes, what do characters have to do >> with this? Are there some String objects being passed into Sockets? >> >> -Nathan >> >> > >> > On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Nathan Beyer <nbe...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 8:11 PM, Tony Wu<wuyue...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi, Nathan >> >> > I dont like assertion on byte arrays. The error message printed out by >> >> > junit is less readable than String when it fails. >> >> >> >> That's a trivial problem to fix - write a helper method that does a >> >> better assert - i've written such a thing dozens of times. Not to >> >> mention, if you use JUnit 4 - this is no longer a problem = >> >> >> >> >> http://junit.org/apidocs/org/junit/Assert.html#assertArrayEquals%28byte[],%20byte[]%29<http://junit.org/apidocs/org/junit/Assert.html#assertArrayEquals%28byte%5B%5D,%20byte%5B%5D%29> >> < >> http://junit.org/apidocs/org/junit/Assert.html#assertArrayEquals%28byte%5B%5D,%20byte%5B%5D%29 >> > >> >> In addition, there's several hamcrest matchers for even better error >> >> descriptions. The dependency is there, it just needs to be used. >> >> >> >> -Nathan >> >> >> >> > What' more it's a >> >> > nightmare if you want to append or remove some bytes. >> >> > >> >> > On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 7:48 AM, Nathan Beyer<nbe...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 5:02 AM, Kevin Zhou<zhoukevi...@gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> Hi Nathan, >> >> >>> Yes. Actually I do try the String(byte[], String) on z/OS but still >> >> fail to >> >> >>> solve the previous failure. As I tested, the Socket on Z returns >> >> strings in >> >> >>> platform-dependent encoding, thus the String(byte[]) is adopted. >> >> >> >> >> >> Why is this even asserting with Strings? Shouldn't the assertions be >> >> >> using byte values for fixtures? >> >> >> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Nathan Beyer <ndbe...@apache.org> >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>>> This code is now platform-dependant. The String(byte[]) assumes the >> >> >>>> bytes are encoded in the platform's default encoding. The code >> should >> >> >>>> really use String(byte[], String) with a specific encoding. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> -Nathan >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 10:29 PM, <zhouke...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >>>> > Author: zhoukevin >> >> >>>> > Date: Fri Jul 31 03:29:46 2009 >> >> >>>> > New Revision: 799505 >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=799505&view=rev >> >> >>>> > Log: >> >> >>>> > Fix test failure of SocketTest.test_sendUrgentDataI method for >> z/OS. >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > Modified: >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> >> >> >> harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/luni/src/test/api/common/org/apache/harmony/luni/tests/java/net/SocketTest.java >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > Modified: >> >> >>>> >> >> >> harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/luni/src/test/api/common/org/apache/harmony/luni/tests/java/net/SocketTest.java >> >> >>>> > URL: >> >> >>>> >> >> >> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/luni/src/test/api/common/org/apache/harmony/luni/tests/java/net/SocketTest.java?rev=799505&r1=799504&r2=799505&view=diff >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> >> >> >> ============================================================================== >> >> >>>> > --- >> >> >>>> >> >> >> harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/luni/src/test/api/common/org/apache/harmony/luni/tests/java/net/SocketTest.java >> >> >>>> (original) >> >> >>>> > +++ >> >> >>>> >> >> >> harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/luni/src/test/api/common/org/apache/harmony/luni/tests/java/net/SocketTest.java >> >> >>>> Fri Jul 31 03:29:46 2009 >> >> >>>> > @@ -1582,8 +1582,10 @@ >> >> >>>> > server.close(); >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > receivedString = new String(myBytes, 0, totalBytesRead); >> >> >>>> > - assertEquals("Urgent data was not received with one >> urgent >> >> >>>> byte", >> >> >>>> > - sendString + (char) urgentByte + sendString, >> >> >>>> receivedString); >> >> >>>> > + assertEquals( >> >> >>>> > + "Urgent data was not received with one urgent >> >> byte", >> >> >>>> > + sendString + new String(new byte[] { urgentByte >> }) >> >> + >> >> >>>> sendString, >> >> >>>> > + receivedString); >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > /* >> >> >>>> > * Test 3: Now validate that urgent data is received as >> >> expected. >> >> >>>> Expect >> >> >>>> > @@ -1634,7 +1636,8 @@ >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > receivedString = new String(myBytes, 0, totalBytesRead); >> >> >>>> > assertEquals("Urgent data was not received with two >> urgent >> >> >>>> bytes", >> >> >>>> > - sendString + (char) urgentByte1 + (char) >> >> urgentByte2 >> >> >>>> > + sendString >> >> >>>> > + + new String(new byte[] { urgentByte1, >> >> >>>> urgentByte2 }) >> >> >>>> > + sendString, receivedString); >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > /* >> >> >>>> > @@ -1663,8 +1666,8 @@ >> >> >>>> > client.close(); >> >> >>>> > server.close(); >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > - assertEquals("Sole urgent data was not received", (int) >> >> >>>> urgentByte, >> >> >>>> > - byteRead); >> >> >>>> > + assertEquals("Sole urgent data was not received", >> >> >>>> > + (int) (urgentByte & 0xff), byteRead); >> >> >>>> > } >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > /** >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> > >> >> >>>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >>> Best regards, >> >> >>> Yours, Kevin Zhou >> >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Tony Wu >> >> > China Software Development Lab, IBM >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Best regards, >> > Yours, Kevin Zhou >> > >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Yours, Kevin Zhou >
