Go ahead and push.
(Optimizing test runs is pretty important long term)
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Stuart Marks
wrote:
> On 5/14/15 1:22 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>
>> I'm curious: have you tried with using a lambda instead? changing:
>>
>> 394 static void check(String desc, boolean c
On 5/14/15 1:22 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
I'm curious: have you tried with using a lambda instead? changing:
394 static void check(String desc, boolean cond) {
395 if (cond) {
396 pass();
397 } else {
398 fail(desc);
399 }
400 }
On 5/14/15 12:58 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote:
Or could use jdk.testlibrary.Asserts.assertEquals, if you want to avoid
spinning up the testng machinery, and generating yet another xml test report.
If you are only interested in assertEquals.
Unfortunately there are several assertions that aren't si
Hi Martin, thanks for taking a look.
It probably would be a good idea to convert this test (and a whole bunch of
others) to Test-NG. However, that's more change than I want to bite off at this
point, so I'd prefer to stick with my change as it stands right now.
s'marks
On 5/13/15 7:24 PM, Ma
Hi Stuart,
On 5/14/15 3:44 AM, Stuart Marks wrote:
Hi all,
Please review this change to optimize a test. Basically the test did
string formatting for every assertion, but the string was thrown away
if the assertion passed -- the most common case. The change is to do
the string formatting onl
On 14 May 2015, at 03:24, Martin Buchholz wrote:
> Your changes look good,
Yes, this is a nice improvement.
> but:
>
> 204 check(map.size() == i, "insertion: map expected size
> m%d != i%d", map.size(), i);
>
> many of those detail messages look like leftovers from a long debuggi
Your changes look good, but:
204 check(map.size() == i, "insertion: map expected size
m%d != i%d", map.size(), i);
many of those detail messages look like leftovers from a long debugging
session. Here I would consider converting to a testng test (I ended up
doing this a few times my
Hi all,
Please review this change to optimize a test. Basically the test did string
formatting for every assertion, but the string was thrown away if the assertion
passed -- the most common case. The change is to do the string formatting only
when an assertion fails and information needs to be
