On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 10:49:19AM -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: > But.... these are the names of *test case methods*.
Yes indeed. Lazy consensus works well when the thing we don't care about is the thing where we let the people that do care have their way with them, innit? Very efficient! > Can someone give me a use case where having this gibberish name really, > practically, adds any value? No doubt that's not possible given certain definitions of use case, value, and practicality. If you're like me, you type Alt+Ctrl+T in IntelliJ while having a method-to-test selected and it generates the test case name. So there is a use case (me writing a test), quite a practical one, and the value is that it saves me from having to rename a method. My environment is set up well for this kind of convention. Arguably, that's not important since I'm not writing tests for harmony right now. And even less important since most developers arond here seem to be using eclipse. Similarly, I often try and keep my methods sorted alphabetically (again, a convention, chosen since IntelliJ can do it automatically). If you name tests after the method they test and after what they do to that method, it results in a nicely organised testcase. Also not very relevant here. But it might be "use cases". Sounds more like making good use of a "convention" (and here we enter the "convention over configuration" meme which nowadays you can't get away with without a reference to ruby on rails. Soon it'll be religious...). The only use case for a convention is that it is a convention. Qualifying one convention as gibberish makes me wonder what the qualification is for all the other stuff. Its simple. There are some people out there that do it like that, some tools that are tailored for use by those people, hence it is some sort of convention. There is probably a convention or two in all the tests that we have right now too. Apparently its gibberish-ish too, otherwise this thread would not be there. > In the end, I could argue it doesn't matter (since it could be in Urdu > for me...) but before we all waste the time to construct these 'tokens' > that have embedded meaning, I'd love to hear a use case... I think I have just argued that what matters is that there is *a* convention. All I did was mention one that I knew of. I try not to invent any of my own. Urdu doesn't seem to be the right one, but it might be a lot of fun (like recursive acronyms, or pronouncing luni like "looney")! ciao! LSD --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
