Sorry for the late response! Looks like I need to pay attention to the
jigsaw alias from now on :-)
On 1/12/2016 12:10 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
On 11/01/2016 03:02, Frank Yuan wrote:
Hi Alan and Joe
Would you like to have a review for test task
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8078820?
The webrev is at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~fyuan/8078820/webrev.00/.
Is the test correct? It seems to me it passes with or without
"violations", which's proved by the three test cases. If provider1/2
doesn't provide any factory impl, the test still passes, am I right?
JAXP has several service provider interfaces to allow for deployment
of alternative XML parser implementations, in this test suite, there
are 2 named modules providing different interfaces, main test
ModularXMLParserTest tests some different combinations to verify if
JAXP library can instantiate the xml impl from correct modules.
Thanks for this. If I read the test correctly then it exercises the
scenario where they is one or two XML providers on the application
module path. One other scenario to consider is doing dynamic
configuration and creating a layer that has application and XML parser
modules. That way you can check that the XML APIs (in the boot layer)
are correctly locating the XML parser in the child layer. This could
be extended to creating two child layers with applications that bundle
different XML providers. Lots of assertions to test in that scenario.
Joe - where are XML tests going these days? I see Frank's patch adds
these new tests to the jdk repo, presumably because of test
infrastructure. Just asking because it looks like all the recent
functional + API tests were pushed to the jaxp repo and it's only
regression tests that remain in the jdk repo. My personal view is that
we should just drop the jaxp repo and move all the code into the jdk
repo but that is a question for elsewhere. In the mean-time then I
would assume the goal is to have all the tests in the same hierarchy
rather than sibling repos, right?
I'm all for removing the jaxp repo, although my IDE would get bloated
with millions of JDK classes :-) In that sense, or for dev
efficiencies, it's nice to keep it.
For the test, it can certainly be located in the jaxp repo, e.g.
test/javax/xml/jaxp/modules or functional tests. But it looks like Frank
was trying to take advantage of jdk.testlibrary.
-Joe
-Alan
