On 12 January 2011 08:12, Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > Because people who have not read and understood concurrency in > practice often do not understand how the synchronization points affect > jvm sequencing, people often wrongly suspect that result of > instrumented and non-instrumented code is the same. > > I have had bugs which were not caught by unit tests because: > 1. The test passed when the code was not instrumented and failed when > the code was instrumented > 2. The test failed when the code was not instrumented and passed when > the code was instrumented
This is just silly. If you want to test your concurrent code then write specific tests for it. What you are doing is changing the environment (a tiny bit) and hoping that you will find something. If that is your strategy then make a big change to your environment and run your tests in really different environments: IDE vs CLI, Windows vs Linux, desktop vs build server, etcetera. A normal unit test should run once, more is just a waste of time. The fact that Maven will run unit tests multiple times is a bug that we apparently have to live with. It is not a feature. If this bug were fixed and you still wanted to run your unit tests twice then you could configure that quite easily in your POM. Everybody happy. > As a result of my experiences I will not help you Then why reply? Are you suggesting we now all start replying to everything so that everyone knows we can not/will not help and why? :-P --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org
