Hi, +1 for (3), but I think it will be better to define suite() method and enumerate passing tests there rather than to comment out the code.
2006/6/27, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hello Vladimir, +1 to option 3) . We shall comment the failed test cases out and add FIXME to remind us to diagnose the problems later. ;-) Vladimir Ivanov wrote: > I see your point. > But I feel that we can miss regression in non-tested code if we exclude > TestCases. > Now, for example we miss testing of java.lang.Class/Process/Thread/String > and some other classes. > > While we have failing tests and don't want to pay attention to these > failures we can: > 1) Leave things as is – do not run TestCases with failing tests. > 2) Split passing/failing TestCase into separate "failing TestCase" and > "passing TestCase" and exclude "failing TestCases". When test or > implementation is fixed we move tests from failing TestCase to passing > TestCase. > 3) Comment failing tests in TestCases. It is better to run 58 tests > instead > of 0 for String. > 4) Run all TestCases, then, compare test run results with the 'list of > known > failures' and see whether new failures appeared. This, I think, is better > then 1, 2 and 3, but, overhead is that we support 2 lists - list of known > failing tests and exclude list where we put crashing tests. > > Thanks, Vladimir > On 6/26/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Mikhail Loenko wrote: >> > Hi Vladimir, >> > >> > IMHO the tests are to verify that an update does not introduce any >> > regression. So there are two options: remember which exactly tests may >> fail >> > and remember that all tests must pass. I believe the latter one is >> a bit >> > easier and safer. >> >> +1 >> >> Tim >> >> > Thanks, >> > Mikhail >> > >> > 2006/6/26, Vladimir Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> Hi, >> >> Working with tests I noticed that we are excluding some tests just >> >> because >> >> several tests from single TestCase fail. >> >> >> >> For example, the TestCase 'tests.api.java.lang.StringTest' has 60 >> >> tests and >> >> only 2 of them fails. But the build excludes the whole TestCase >> and we >> >> just >> >> miss testing of java.lang.String implementation. >> >> >> >> Do we really need to exclude TestCases in 'ant test' target? >> >> >> >> My suggestion is: do not exclude any tests until it crashes VM. >> >> If somebody needs a list of tests that always passed a separated >> >> target can >> >> be added to build. >> >> >> >> Do you think we should add target 'test-all' to the build? >> >> Thanks, Vladimir >> >> >> >> >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> >> -- >> >> Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) >> IBM Java technology centre, UK. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > -- Richard Liang China Software Development Lab, IBM
-- Alexei Zakharov, Intel Middleware Product Division --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
