will pugh wrote:
I'm not too familiar with the Harmony code yet, but since I've had a
bunch of experience on large projects I thought I'd toss my $.02 in here.
1) When dealing with a project as large and with as much surface area
as a VM, your unit tests for the entire project will probably t
On 3/30/06, Richard Liang wrote:
> Stepan Mishura wrote:
> > On 3/30/06, Richard Liang wrote:
> [SNIP]
> > IMHO, this relates to "stress tests and load tests" only. This means
> that we
> > shouldn't put such kind of tests in a 'regular test suite'. The 'regular
> > test suite' is used to verify
I'm not too familiar with the Harmony code yet, but since I've had a
bunch of experience on large projects I thought I'd toss my $.02 in here.
1) When dealing with a project as large and with as much surface area
as a VM, your unit tests for the entire project will probably take
several hours
Stepan Mishura wrote:
On 3/30/06, Richard Liang wrote:
Dears,
I notice that we put all the test code into one big test method (for
example,
org.apache.harmony.tests.java.util.jar.test_putLjava_lang_ObjectLjava_lang_Object
).
This way we will lose some benefits of junit and even unit test:
> [SNIP]
>
> IMHO, this relates to "stress tests and load tests" only. This means that we
> shouldn't put such kind of tests in a 'regular test suite'. The 'regular
> test suite' is used to verify regressions only. Returning back to a test's
> size, I think it is up to developer - we can only recom
On 3/30/06, Richard Liang wrote:
>
> Dears,
>
> I notice that we put all the test code into one big test method (for
> example,
>
> org.apache.harmony.tests.java.util.jar.test_putLjava_lang_ObjectLjava_lang_Object
> ).
> This way we will lose some benefits of junit and even unit test:
> 1. Test co
