ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nathaniel Spurling" <>
Subject Re: Artima SuiteRunner Task
Date Wed, 26 Mar 2003 17:07:54 GMT

On Wednesday, March 26, 2003, at 11:46  AM, Nathaniel Spurling wrote:
   > Regarding suiterunner vs JUnit, I prefer the suiterunner API:
   >       test methods can throw Exceptions, also assertion failures
   > generate Exceptions so you can put one catch(Exception) at the bottom
   > of your method and print out any useful info before throwing the
   > exception on, rather than separate ones for AssertionFailedError and
   > Exception which looks very messy. Alternatively you can leave out the
   > try/catch altogether  - saves typing if you just want the stacktrace
   > -- I Don't find the failures/exceptions distinction useful in JUnit.

   I often simply have my JUnit testXXX throw Exception since that is
   unexpected and a test failure/error.  I don't quite get how SuiteRunner
   is different here.

say you've got a method which goes:

      testXXX() throws Exception{

            //generate random data

                  //do testing

            } catch(Exception e){
                  //print data used
                  throw e;

 in JUnit you need an extra catch(AssertionFailedError) clause in the event of an assertion
being untrue - not a big difference, but if all your tests are the same format it's preferable.


This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended
recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and
destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorized copying, disclosure or distribution of the material
in this e-mail is strictly forbidden.

View raw message