OK, now I see. I'll provide a script to convert the tests. Thanks, Mikhail
On 1/16/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > at the risk of getting dragged into this ;-) > > I think George's objection is to the extension mechanism being used > (i.e. a custom subclass rather than a standard JUnit decoration [1]). > > Adding more and more subclasses is not a practical way to go if you > think of all the different ways you may choose to extend the framework's > behaviour. > > Regards, > Tim > > [1] http://junit.sourceforge.net/javadoc/junit/extensions/TestDecorator.html > > Mikhail Loenko wrote: > > Sorry, but I cannot catch what is the problem. > > If some output is annoying please send the test name and what is wrong with > > it. > > PerformanceTest class does not add any output to what the tests print. > > > > For now the only implication from the fact that all the tests extend > > PerfromanceTest > > is that the security classes are well performance-tuned and on the majority > > of > > scenarios outperform "standard" Java implementations. > > > > Thanks, > > Mikhail Loenko > > Intel Middleware Products Division > > > > On 1/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >>Loenko, Mikhail Y wrote: > >> > >>>Hi George > >>> > >>>We will remove all the tests and these QA guys will never disturb us :) > >>> > >>>Every time we remove a test we leave something untested. > >>> > >>>For example, SerializationTest is a base for all the tests that check > >>>serialization compatibility, and if we remove it because we do not > >>>think about serialization right now we will lose that compatibility. > >>> > >>>The same for performance, it is of importance still. Existing test suite > >>>allows us seeking performance regressions. Otherwise we will have > >>>to keep in sync two parallel test suites - one PerformanceTest based > >>>just for testing the performance and another one - for unit testing. > >> > >>I love this subject - unit tests an performance tests are different, as > >>can be regression tests, although one might argue that many of the > >>so-called regression tests are just unit tests that you forgot to do in > >>the first place. > >> > >> > >>>So, what is the noise? GUI is thinking that those base classes are > >>>tests? > >>>Maybe it makes sense to rename PerformanceTest to e.g. PerformanceTost > >>>and GUI will be happy? > >> > >>No. :/ > >> > >>Can we change the output to be meaningful? I remember a while back on > >>another project that I knew the timings of things on my machine just > >>from practice, and I could tell when we changed something that impacted > >>performance, because the tests ran longer. This helped catch problems > >>early. > >> > >>geir > >> > >> > >> > >>>Thanks, > >>>Mikhail Loenko > >>>Intel Middleware Products Division > >>> > >>> > >>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>From: George Harley1 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 7:24 PM > >>>>To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org > >>>>Subject: RE: Unit test code in HARMONY-16 > >>>> > >>>>Hi Mikhail, > >>>> > >>>>Thanks for your very complete answer. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>At some point we had different functionality in the > >>>>>PerformanceTest but it seems to have died now. That is basically it. > >>>> > >>>>Do you see this class (and its SecurityTest and SerializationTest > >>>>subclasses) as candidates for removal then ? When I run the security > >>> > >>>unit > >>> > >>>>tests inside my IDE they add some extra lines to the console output > >>> > >>>but, > >>> > >>>>since I am not thinking about performance right now, that is just > >>>>"background noise". > >>>> > >>>>Perhaps additional performance-related functionality would be better > >>> > >>>moved > >>> > >>>>out of the test class' hierarchy and into some decorator class ? That > >>> > >>>way > >>> > >>>>would give developers a bit more flexibility running the tests with or > >>>>without the intervention of the performance measurement code. Sound > >>>>reasonable ? > >>>> > >>>>Best regards, > >>>>George > >>>>________________________________________ > >>>>George C. Harley > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>"Loenko, Mikhail Y" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>>13/01/2006 12:12 > >>>>Please respond to > >>>>harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>To > >>>><harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org> > >>>>cc > >>>> > >>>>Subject > >>>>RE: Unit test code in HARMONY-16 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>As far as we did not have special performance tests, we used unit tests > >>>>to measure performance, i.e. to compare performance of our classes to > >>>>performance of "standard" classes. So we ran in cycle a single unit > >>> > >>>test > >>> > >>>>on both when there are our security classes in bootclasspath and when > >>>>there are not. And compared time. (Of course, not all the tests passed > >>>>on "RI") > >>>> > >>>>Some unit tests print various logs that make execution time volatile. > >>> > >>>To > >>> > >>>>make it more stable we used log() instead of System.out.print() and in > >>>>the "performance mode" did not print anything. log() is defined in the > >>>>PerformanceTest. At some point we had different functionality in the > >>>>PerformanceTest but it seems to have died now. That is basically it. > >>>> > >>>>The results helped us to find a number of performance leaks and improve > >>>>overall quality of the code. > >>>> > >>>>Thanks, > >>>>Mikhail Loenko > >>>>Intel Middleware Products Division > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>-----Original Message----- > >>>>>From: George Harley1 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>>>Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 10:05 PM > >>>>>To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org > >>>>>Subject: Unit test code in HARMONY-16 > >>>>> > >>>>>Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>>I have been looking into running the JUnit tests included in > >>> > >>>HARMONY-16 > >>> > >>>>in > >>>> > >>>>>my private sandbox. From what I have seen so far most (all ?) of the > >>>> > >>>>test > >>>> > >>>>>cases inherit from a base class PerformanceTest in the > >>>>>com.openintel.drl.security.test package. What is the purpose of this > >>>> > >>>>base > >>>> > >>>>>class ? > >>>>> > >>>>>Best regards, > >>>>>George > >>>>>________________________________________ > >>>>>George C. Harley > >>> > >>> > > > > -- > > Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) > IBM Java technology centre, UK. >
