I'm trying to call a service inside a simple method test and the
expected behavior is for the service to return an error. Because the
service error is actually a test case success I don't want the simple
method to return an error.
I actually committed it yesterday, you can see the code in
What are you trying to do?
-David
On Dec 13, 2009, at 12:32 AM, Scott Gray wrote:
> Okay thanks David, it just makes testing failure scenarios a bit of a pain
> using simple methods, you have to set break-on-error to false,
> require-new-transaction to true and then you also have to clear th
Okay thanks David, it just makes testing failure scenarios a bit of a
pain using simple methods, you have to set break-on-error to false,
require-new-transaction to true and then you also have to clear the
responseMessage and errorMessageList after the service call. But if
that the way it'
Yes, that's correct, it does not undo the error, it simply keeps it from
interrupting the flow so you can do other things.
If you want to "undo" the error, or have it be independent, then technically it
needs to run in its own transaction in addition to doing something to no pass
the error up
I'm trying to use call-service's break-on-error="false" attribute but
my simple method still returns an error at the end of the method, so
break-on-error="false" seems to just delay the error instead of
breaking straight away on the service call. This happens because the
service call error
