The same applies to changing access modifiers. JUnit 5 encourages use of
package private everything as it’s the least typing and now supported (as in v5
will reflectively allow access to your test code if it’s not public).
—
Matt Sicker
> On Feb 17, 2022, at 19:59, Gary Gregory wrote:
>
>
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 8:47 PM Itamar C wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 8:16 PM Gilles Sadowski
> wrote:
>
> > Which discussion (since this thread covered more than one subject)?
> > If you mean the "migration to Junit 5" task for [Codec], it's already
> > there.[1]
> > If you mean the method
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 8:16 PM Gilles Sadowski
wrote:
> Which discussion (since this thread covered more than one subject)?
> If you mean the "migration to Junit 5" task for [Codec], it's already
> there.[1]
> If you mean the method rename (to remove the "test" prefix), then
> the "dev" ML is
Hi.
Le jeu. 17 févr. 2022 à 21:33, Itamar C a écrit :
>
> Hello,
>
> My suggestion: I'll work on the methods without renaming and after the
> migration is completed, if we decide to rename, it's not difficult to
> rename all test methods with a script and put in a new PR.
>
> A simple regexp
Hello,
My suggestion: I'll work on the methods without renaming and after the
migration is completed, if we decide to rename, it's not difficult to
rename all test methods with a script and put in a new PR.
A simple regexp like
"^\\s*@Test\\s*\n\\s*(.+)\\s+test(\\w)(\\w+)\\s*\\(.*"
changing to
Hello.
Le jeu. 17 févr. 2022 à 16:18, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>
> Well, it is explicitly in the sense that I would guess that 95% of the test
> methods in Commons follows that style and that one our documented
> guidelines is "follow the style of the file you are editing".
When migrating to the
Well, it is explicitly in the sense that I would guess that 95% of the test
methods in Commons follows that style and that one our documented
guidelines is "follow the style of the file you are editing".
Gary
On Thu, Feb 17, 2022, 09:16 Gilles Sadowski wrote:
> Hello.
>
> Le jeu. 17 févr. 2022
Hello.
Le jeu. 17 févr. 2022 à 13:11, Gary Gregory a écrit :
>
> I have encountered what Sebb mentions more than once, I do like the "test"
> prefix to make it obvious what is and is not intended to be a test. Same
> reason I like to make test methods public: clear intent. I know Junit 5
>
I have encountered what Sebb mentions more than once, I do like the "test"
prefix to make it obvious what is and is not intended to be a test. Same
reason I like to make test methods public: clear intent. I know Junit 5
proposes to change these conventions, the benefit do not outweigh the
On Thu, 17 Feb 2022 at 01:16, Gilles Sadowski wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> > [...]
> >
> > One more practical question: since the tests are not anymore based on the
> > methods name and are indicated by annotations now, I've seen tests without
> > this "test" in the beginning. Looks like common practice
10 matches
Mail list logo
