[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRUNIT-119?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13423830#comment-13423830
]
Jim Donofrio commented on MRUNIT-119:
-------------------------------------
This might be beyond the scope of this JIRA. Maybe it is best for you to just
go with the current implementation of withStrictCounterChecking and we can open
another JIRA to fix the general problem affecting this method and withCounter
and others. We have a lot of duplicate code in order to have the fluent style
methods
How about instead of another interface we add a unbound type parameter T to
TestDriver and then all the fluent methods could go in TestDriver but return
type T. The base classes, MapDriverBase etc, would just pass the T on so you
would have:
public abstract class TestDriver<K1, V1, K2, V2, T>
public abstract class MapDriverBase<K1, V1, K2, V2, T> extends TestDriver<K1,
V1, K2, V2, T>
public class MapDriver<K1, V1, K2, V2> extends MapDriverBase<K1, V1, K2, V2,
MapDriver<K1, V1, K2, V2>>
> Counter tests should support assertions that counters are not present
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MRUNIT-119
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MRUNIT-119
> Project: MRUnit
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 1.0.0
> Reporter: Dave Beech
> Assignee: Bertrand Dechoux
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: mrunit-119-proposal.diff, mrunit-119-proposal.diff
>
>
> From Bertrand Dechoux via user mailing list.
> Should we add a feature to the counter checking feature so that users can
> assert that something will *not* be present, for example an error or
> exception counter, and have the test fail if it is set?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
