On Thu, 18 Nov 2021 13:50:23 GMT, Pavel Rappo <pra...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> When one is planning to have many methods, one should better have a plan for >> how to maintain them. Such a plan should cover navigation, search, and if >> growth is foreseen, naming new methods. A naming scheme could in itself be >> such a plan. >> >> I've tried alternative naming schemes but found this one to work best. It's >> obviously possible that I missed something. If you have other ideas, please >> share and let's discuss them. > >> I assume the purpose of this naming scheme is to make visible what >> combinations of features are covered by each test. I'm not sure I would >> consider this enough benefit to justify method names which are very verbose >> and hard to read (especially when you don't have fresh memory of the scheme >> above). > > You are right when saying that this naming scheme helps to survey the test > landscape. This is especially helpful while mass-developing tests, which is > what I'm doing at the moment. Do you think we could add an underscore here and there to improve readability? For example, we could separate the first four parts of the name from the last part, which is a custom string: testNegativeExternalTag_FileNotFoundModuleSourcePath I'm not against "camelCase", but I have to admit that "snake_case" or a reasonable mix of both styles might work better for longer names. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6359
