Re: [classlib] [tests] Can anyone explain what these are for?
I've written a script to search all the statements like that:
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
use File::Find;
use DirHandle;
use strict;
my $dir = $ARGV[0] || die need input a dir\n;
chomp $dir;
processDir($dir);
sub processDir {
my $folder = $_[0];
my $dh = DirHandle-new($folder) || die can not open directiony: $!\n;
foreach my $f ($dh-read()) {
next if ($f=~/^\.$|^\.\.$|^\..*$/);
if (-d $folder\/$f){
processDir($folder\/$f);
}
if ($f=~/^.*Test\.java$/){
processFile($folder\/$f);
}
}
}
sub processFile {
my $f = $_[0];
my $lineNum = 1;
my $line=;
open (MYFILE,$f) || die can not open file: $!\n;
while ($line=MYFILE){
chomp $line;
if ($line=~/^\s*assertTrue.*true\s*\)\s*;\s*$/){
print $f:$lineNum\n;
}
$lineNum = $lineNum +1;
}
}
And found 88 statements like that in current classlib, then record them in
[1].
We can check them.
[1].http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Invalid_assertTrue
On 10/11/06, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps, but there are much better ways of determining that. From just
reading the test code to code coverage tools.
From my analysis, these were part of the large test contribution and
indicated that there wasn't an explicit test for that method. In most
cases, there were tests for these methods, either in other classes or
in other methods of the class.
Nathan, I agree ;-)
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen a few and I've deleted any that I've come across. I would
say feel free to delete them too. I've also been deleting empty
setup
and teardown methods too.
Please do not simply delete them. Maybe that means we are lack of the
test for some methods, for example getInetAddress.
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These could be a result of copy/paste tests creation.
And I'm curious why it was written for the first time. :)
SY, Alexey
2006/10/10, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've come across a couple of tests with things like:
public void test_getInetAddress() {
assertTrue(Used to test, true);
}
Can anyone explain why we have these?
Regards,
Mark.
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Richard Liang
China Development Lab, IBM
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Richard Liang
China Development Lab, IBM
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Robert Hu
China Software Development Lab, IBM
Re: [classlib] [tests] Can anyone explain what these are for?
Some tests for beans contained the code like this:
---
public void testGetArguments() {
// Covered in the testcases for the constructor
}
public void testGetMethodName() {
// Covered in the testcases for the constructor
}
---
I just commented it out. I could simply delete it but decided that we
may need it in the future. When we finish with 1.5 and everybody will
have a lot of free time - we can get back to it and think again: do we
need to insert an additional test case here?
Regards,
2006/10/11, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps, but there are much better ways of determining that. From just
reading the test code to code coverage tools.
From my analysis, these were part of the large test contribution and
indicated that there wasn't an explicit test for that method. In most
cases, there were tests for these methods, either in other classes or
in other methods of the class.
Nathan, I agree ;-)
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen a few and I've deleted any that I've come across. I would
say feel free to delete them too. I've also been deleting empty setup
and teardown methods too.
Please do not simply delete them. Maybe that means we are lack of the
test for some methods, for example getInetAddress.
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These could be a result of copy/paste tests creation.
And I'm curious why it was written for the first time. :)
SY, Alexey
2006/10/10, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've come across a couple of tests with things like:
public void test_getInetAddress() {
assertTrue(Used to test, true);
}
Can anyone explain why we have these?
--
Alexei Zakharov,
Intel Middleware Product Division
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [classlib] [tests] Can anyone explain what these are for?
On 10/11/06, Alexei Zakharov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some tests for beans contained the code like this:
---
public void testGetArguments() {
// Covered in the testcases for the constructor
}
public void testGetMethodName() {
// Covered in the testcases for the constructor
}
---
I just commented it out. I could simply delete it but decided that we
may need it in the future. When we finish with 1.5 and everybody will
have a lot of free time - we can get back to it and think again: do we
need to insert an additional test case here?
Yes. My suggestion is marking these tests with TODO. It's easy for
remindering. Eventually, we'll decide whether removing the TODOs or writing
more test code there.
Thanks!
2006/10/11, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps, but there are much better ways of determining that. From just
reading the test code to code coverage tools.
From my analysis, these were part of the large test contribution and
indicated that there wasn't an explicit test for that method. In most
cases, there were tests for these methods, either in other classes or
in other methods of the class.
Nathan, I agree ;-)
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen a few and I've deleted any that I've come across. I would
say feel free to delete them too. I've also been deleting empty
setup
and teardown methods too.
Please do not simply delete them. Maybe that means we are lack of the
test for some methods, for example getInetAddress.
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These could be a result of copy/paste tests creation.
And I'm curious why it was written for the first time. :)
SY, Alexey
2006/10/10, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've come across a couple of tests with things like:
public void test_getInetAddress() {
assertTrue(Used to test, true);
}
Can anyone explain why we have these?
--
Alexei Zakharov,
Intel Middleware Product Division
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Best regards,
Andrew Zhang
Re: [classlib] [tests] Can anyone explain what these are for?
These could be a result of copy/paste tests creation.
And I'm curious why it was written for the first time. :)
SY, Alexey
2006/10/10, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've come across a couple of tests with things like:
public void test_getInetAddress() {
assertTrue(Used to test, true);
}
Can anyone explain why we have these?
Regards,
Mark.
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [classlib] [tests] Can anyone explain what these are for?
I've seen a few and I've deleted any that I've come across. I would
say feel free to delete them too. I've also been deleting empty setup
and teardown methods too.
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These could be a result of copy/paste tests creation.
And I'm curious why it was written for the first time. :)
SY, Alexey
2006/10/10, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've come across a couple of tests with things like:
public void test_getInetAddress() {
assertTrue(Used to test, true);
}
Can anyone explain why we have these?
Regards,
Mark.
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [classlib] [tests] Can anyone explain what these are for?
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen a few and I've deleted any that I've come across. I would
say feel free to delete them too. I've also been deleting empty setup
and teardown methods too.
Please do not simply delete them. Maybe that means we are lack of the
test for some methods, for example getInetAddress.
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These could be a result of copy/paste tests creation.
And I'm curious why it was written for the first time. :)
SY, Alexey
2006/10/10, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've come across a couple of tests with things like:
public void test_getInetAddress() {
assertTrue(Used to test, true);
}
Can anyone explain why we have these?
Regards,
Mark.
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Richard Liang
China Development Lab, IBM
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [classlib] [tests] Can anyone explain what these are for?
Perhaps, but there are much better ways of determining that. From just
reading the test code to code coverage tools.
From my analysis, these were part of the large test contribution and
indicated that there wasn't an explicit test for that method. In most
cases, there were tests for these methods, either in other classes or
in other methods of the class.
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen a few and I've deleted any that I've come across. I would
say feel free to delete them too. I've also been deleting empty setup
and teardown methods too.
Please do not simply delete them. Maybe that means we are lack of the
test for some methods, for example getInetAddress.
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These could be a result of copy/paste tests creation.
And I'm curious why it was written for the first time. :)
SY, Alexey
2006/10/10, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've come across a couple of tests with things like:
public void test_getInetAddress() {
assertTrue(Used to test, true);
}
Can anyone explain why we have these?
Regards,
Mark.
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Richard Liang
China Development Lab, IBM
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [classlib] [tests] Can anyone explain what these are for?
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps, but there are much better ways of determining that. From just
reading the test code to code coverage tools.
From my analysis, these were part of the large test contribution and
indicated that there wasn't an explicit test for that method. In most
cases, there were tests for these methods, either in other classes or
in other methods of the class.
Nathan, I agree ;-)
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Richard Liang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/11/06, Nathan Beyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen a few and I've deleted any that I've come across. I would
say feel free to delete them too. I've also been deleting empty setup
and teardown methods too.
Please do not simply delete them. Maybe that means we are lack of the
test for some methods, for example getInetAddress.
-Nathan
On 10/10/06, Alexey Petrenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
These could be a result of copy/paste tests creation.
And I'm curious why it was written for the first time. :)
SY, Alexey
2006/10/10, Mark Hindess [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've come across a couple of tests with things like:
public void test_getInetAddress() {
assertTrue(Used to test, true);
}
Can anyone explain why we have these?
Regards,
Mark.
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Alexey A. Petrenko
Intel Middleware Products Division
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Richard Liang
China Development Lab, IBM
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Richard Liang
China Development Lab, IBM
-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
