On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 12:08:27 GMT, Marius Hanl <mh...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> on second thought, this is ok as is - I asked because the code is not >> testing a specific requirement. >> The second `assertEquals(18)` might be testing a specific requirement - that >> the count has not changed, right? > > Yes, as far as I can see. so in theory, we could just test the fact that the count has not changed: int ct = rt_31200_count; ... assertEquals(ct, rt_31200_count); this will make the test independent of the first number (which might change) and only test what's important (that the count does not change later). what do you think? ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1360#discussion_r1491304604
