I generally like descriptive names for test methods (and classes) rather
than encoding the bug ID in the name. A comment with the bug ID is very
helpful, and I would support making that a best practice. If the purpose
of a test is non-obvious, a comment explaining it is a good idea.
-- Kevin
On 7/9/2024 2:33 AM, Johan Vos wrote:
Hi,
An interesting question from John Hendrikx
(https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/1283/#discussion_r1637684395)
probably needs some general discussion on this list.
Afaik, we don't have guidelines for how to name tests (in
https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#coding-style-and-testing-guidelines)
In the different test files we have, I see different patterns:
* in some cases, tests are always prefixed with `test` (e.g. `testFoo()`)
* in some cases, tests have a concise but somehow meaningful name
(e.g. `testScrollBarStaysVisible`)
* in some cases, tests refer to JBS issues (e.g. testJDK8309935)
* in some cases, the test is explained in comments.
I think it would be good to have some consistency going forward. (I'm
not advocating we need to rename existing tests!)
I don't have a strong preference myself, but I think the link to the
JBS issue that triggered the creation of a specific test is always
good to have. I am also very ok with comments, but I learned not
everyone likes that.
Thoughts?
- Johan
