I think it makes sense for TypeConversionTestCase to test both get and set.
The DataHelper.convert() methods also test type conversion, but maybe those would be better to test in a DataHelper test case. Frank. "David Adcox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 12/19/2007 11:13:56 AM: > The unit test case org.apache.tuscany.sdo.test.TypeConversionTestCase > exercises the getXXXX() methods on a DataObject, validating > type conversion functions. What is missing from this test, though, is > any conversion testing of the setXXXX() methods. This test suite uses > the set method to seed the primary type, but it doesn't attempt to set > the property using an alternative type. I was looking to add the test > case > I created for Tuscany-1935 and found this test hole. Does it make > sense to go ahead and augment TypeConversionTestCase to validate the > setXXXXX() methods as well? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
