On 4/17/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why it is that complicated?
>
> Why one have jump over utility methods in different classes or even folders to
> understand what a 5-line test does?
>
> testSomething() throw OtherException {
>try {
>ec.do_something_excep
On 4/17/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Very sorry, there're some typing mistakes in last letter. Please ignore it.
Exctually, I haven't noticed any :-). May be because I also do lots of
them. I hope native-speakers will excuse us :-).
Wishes,
--
Anton Avtamonov,
Intel Middleware Pr
On 4/17/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello, Anton,
>
> On 4/17/06, Anton Avtamonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > No, we don't need all those branches. Only the branch for Harmony.
> > Only for those cases when we DO know that we have a deviation.
> > IMHO, I prefer to have all
Very sorry, there're some typing mistakes in last letter. Please ignore it.
Hello, Anton,
On 4/17/06, Andrew Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/17/06, Anton Avtamonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > No, we don't need all those branches. Only the branch for Harmony.
> > Only for tho
On 4/17/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry, Anton, I did not catch.
>
> Only one branch means "no branches, just one way" or does it mean
> "two different ways (one normal way and one branch)"?
>
> If we have just one way, why isHarmony() method necessary?
Mikhail,
Formally two
Hello, Anton,
On 4/17/06, Anton Avtamonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> No, we don't need all those branches. Only the branch for Harmony.
> Only for those cases when we DO know that we have a deviation.
> IMHO, I prefer to have all tests passing on RI (which verify tests
> itself) and on Harmony
Sorry, Anton, I did not catch.
Only one branch means "no branches, just one way" or does it mean
"two different ways (one normal way and one branch)"?
If we have just one way, why isHarmony() method necessary?
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/4/17, Anton Avtamonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 4/17/06, Mikhail
2006/4/17, Anton Avtamonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> In addition, I want to share what I do when testing exceptions.
>
> I created the following basic abstract class:
>
>protected abstract class ExceptionalCase {
>private Class clazz;
>private String msg;
>
>public abstract
On 4/17/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why we should test something other than Harmony?
>
> We might run our tests on different implemetations to
> see whether/how they differ from Harmony, but we do not need
> special branches in our tests like
>
> if( isHarmony() ) {
> assert(ha
In addition, I want to share what I do when testing exceptions.
I created the following basic abstract class:
protected abstract class ExceptionalCase {
private Class clazz;
private String msg;
public abstract void exceptionalAction() throws Exception;
public
Why we should test something other than Harmony?
We might run our tests on different implemetations to
see whether/how they differ from Harmony, but we do not need
special branches in our tests like
if( isHarmony() ) {
assert(harmony behavior)
} else if( is BEA ) {
assert(BEA behav) {
} else
I think we may have this kind of tests.
It is not a problem if we do not pass on other implementations -
we will have a number of test types and some of them will stick
to our implementation. it is OK. So if the message in exception is
important (e.g. IMHO text for an NPE message in a one-argument
On 4/17/06, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, the second issue, should we be checking for messages/descriptions
> in exception
> tests, even to match what Harmony throws? If we do then our api tests
> wont pass on other implementations.
Hi Mark,
As I said already I don't see any huge
Thanks Paulex. I wasn't able to consistently reproducing the problem
so testing is a little tricky but I will take a look at the fixes when
JIRA is revived.
Regards,
Mark.
On 4/17/06, Paulex Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> LvJimmy，Jing wrote:
> > This is the one Stepan found somedays before?
Ok. I think it's a little unfortunate for our users that we can't
match error messages but you are probably correct about them being
copyright.
So, the second issue, should we be checking for messages/descriptions
in exception
tests, even to match what Harmony throws? If we do then our api tests
On 4/17/06, LvJimmy，Jing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Agreed. Try some other words may be better. The only possible un-compatible
> with RI is that some rookie may write codes like:
> try{
>...
> }catch(Except e){
>if (e.getMessage().equals(RI_String)){
>dosomething;
>}
> }
> Bu
Completely agree about using proper 'asserts' :-).
Just want to remind about one more useful pair of methods -
assertSame()/assertNotSame() which are useful when comparing
instances. I saw many times in my practice that assertTrue(instance1
== instance2) was used intead. Besides, assertEquals() is
Matt Benson wrote:
--- Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just in case this helps anyone else.
I noticed something odd this morning. Although the
default excludes
in ant 1.6.2 correctly ignore .svn directories it
doesn't seem to do
so very efficiently. For example, doing:
ant -f mak
LvJimmy，Jing wrote:
This is the one Stepan found somedays before? Perhaps Paulex has fixed it.
Yes, I've raised Harmony-339 to improve several unstable tests and I
think this test has been included, but currently the patch is waiting
for approval.
Mark, you can try to apply it locally to s
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Hi Richard
Do you know, why these beans tests contain package 'sun.beans'?
What kind of classes are there?
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/4/17, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Mikhail Loenko (JIRA) wrote:
[
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-88?page=comm
2006/4/16, LvJimmy，Jing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>
> 2006/4/15, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> >
> >
> > Jimmy, Jing Lv wrote:
> >
> > > One day, with Harmony spreading all over the world, I don't want to
> > > hear anyone saying: "Woo, who's that guy writing these tests named
> > > 't
As subject. :-(
--
Richard Liang
China Software 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 PROTECT
Hi Richard
Do you know, why these beans tests contain package 'sun.beans'?
What kind of classes are there?
Thanks,
Mikhail
2006/4/17, Richard Liang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Mikhail Loenko (JIRA) wrote:
> > [
> > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-88?page=comments#action_12373811
> >
2006/4/17, Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Another type of test that could be improved are those using
> assertTrue to compare two objects for equality. Most of them should
> be using assertEquals, assertNull or assertNotNull.
>
> Using assertEquals automatically gives more meaningful error
2006/4/16, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: LvJimmy，Jing [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2006 9:45 PM
> > To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Long,long testcase name...
> >
> > 2006/4/16, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PR
Mikhail Loenko (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-88?page=comments#action_12373811 ]
Mikhail Loenko commented on HARMONY-88:
---
auth, crypto, and security parts integrated in revision 392891
Hello,
Beans tests are not in
2006/4/16, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Are those strings copyrighted? I mean we obviously cannot copy-paste
> spec to the javadoc comments of our code, and we probably cannot
> copy-paste RI's messages as well.
Agreed. Try some other words may be better. The only possible un-compatibl
Mark Hindess wrote:
Another type of test that could be improved are those using
assertTrue to compare two objects for equality. Most of them should
be using assertEquals, assertNull or assertNotNull.
Using assertEquals automatically gives more meaningful error messages.
I strongly support th
On Friday 14 April 2006 10:51, Paulex Yang wrote:
> Soeren Strassfeld wrote:
> > Ilya Neverov schrieb:
> >
> > Hi Ilya,
> >
> > just followed your link, as I understand it, the endorsed mechanism is
> > only for API Classes, which
> > are developed outside the JCP. This contains the org.w3c, org.xm
Another type of test that could be improved are those using
assertTrue to compare two objects for equality. Most of them should
be using assertEquals, assertNull or assertNotNull.
Using assertEquals automatically gives more meaningful error messages.
It saves people writing asserts like:
asser
What the
Is there a way to moderate harmont-dev so messages like this can never make
it to the list?.
Last thing I need is religious spam
FC
On 4/16/06, Edgardo Maidana Maidana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> VoSier El-hoím
>
¿Para qué queremos unas fiestas pascuales en el siglo XXI?¿Qué beneficio me
puede traer un hombrecito que murió hace 2000 años?¿o mejor, puede esa muerte
pagarme las cuentas, sanar mis heridas y golpes cotidianos, ayudarme con mi
carrera, conseguir que yo obtenga lo deseado?¿Cuál es el sentir
32 matches
Mail list logo
