On 26/May/2010 11:20, sebb wrote: > On 26/05/2010, Mark Hindess <mark.hind...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> On the other hand, >> I'm not convinced that annotations are a good solution either since >> they don't give you fine-grained control so every distinction has to be >> represented by a separate method. > > That seems like a positive benefit to me. If a test method has several > asserts which are independent, then the first fail may be masking > later ones.
So how do you know which of the asserts are independent? Letting them all fall through would seem wrong, since you would likely need to fix the first assertion failure and retest for the later dependent assertions to be meaningful. Without being able to distinguish I think we'd just get lots more failures listed but no way of knowing which ones are false positives. Here's somebody's solution to making the assertions non-fatal. http://www.gnufoo.org/junit/index.html#failures Regards, Tim
