Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
did we decide not to go to TestNG?
Sigh...I guess there must be too many ones have waited too long for
TestNG...(including me)
Paulex - being desperate
Leo Li wrote:
Ya, I think we can.
I would like the new features in JUnit4, but it is written in a quite
different style from current harmony test codes. Migrate them?
Besides, it is related with the thread of JUnit best practice discussing
now. We need to make a decision since we can merge the task of migration
with the action to enforce JUnit best practice.:)
On 11/4/06, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Assuming we get this functioning, does this mean we can use JUnit 4
testing?
-Nathan
On 11/3/06, Leo Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, all
> I have just tested JUnit4.1 on Harmony.
> With J9 VM, harmony passes both on windows xp2 and redhat
enterprise
> 4.0. While drlvm fails on linux, which fails to create new thread
becauseof
> out-of-memory-error. Since it can always be reproduced, I think
actually
> system doesnot lack memory at the time. So I reported it as an
> application-oriented bugs as JIRA [1].
> Besides I have got the time used in these tests which shows
there
is
> space for us to improve our performance.
>
>
>
> VM
>
> Windows xp2
>
> Redhat Enterprise4
>
> RI
>
> 0.985+0.921
>
> 0.75+0.717
>
> J9
>
> 4.25+2.61
>
> 2.888+2.897
>
> drlvm
>
> 8.437+5.359
>
> /
>
> *The former data represents the time to run junit.tests.AllTests The
latter,
> junit.samples.AllTests.
> For detailed information, including how to run tests, I have
posted
it
> on Harmony wiki[2].
>
>
>
> [1]http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2060
> [2]http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/JUnit
> --
> Leo Li
> China Software Development Lab, IBM
>
>
--
Paulex Yang
China Software Development Lab
IBM
