ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kev Jackson <foamd...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [GUMP@vmgump]: Project test-ant-no-xerces (in module ant) failed
Date Thu, 06 Jul 2006 01:26:04 GMT

On 5 Jul 2006, at 19:50, Steve Loughran wrote:

> Gump Integration Build wrote:
>
> oops, my fault.
>> build:
>>      [copy] Copying 2 files to /x1/gump/public/workspace/ant/build/ 
>> classes
>> compile-tests:
>>     [javac] Compiling 56 source files to /x1/gump/public/workspace/ 
>> ant/build/testcases
>>     [javac] /x1/gump/public/workspace/ant/src/testcases/org/apache/ 
>> tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/jdepend/JDependTest.java:92:  
>> assertOutputContaining(java.lang.String) in  
>> org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.optional.jdepend.JDependTest cannot  
>> override assertOutputContaining(java.lang.String) in  
>> org.apache.tools.ant.BuildFileTest; attempting to assign weaker  
>> access privileges; was public
>>     [javac]     protected void assertOutputContaining(String  
>> substring) {
>
>
> fixed by deleting the method,
>
>>     [javac]                    ^
>>     [javac] /x1/gump/public/workspace/ant/src/testcases/org/apache/ 
>> tools/ant/types/selectors/ModifiedSelectorTest.java:924:  
>> assertLogContaining(java.lang.String) in  
>> org.apache.tools.ant.types.selectors.ModifiedSelectorTest.BFT  
>> cannot override assertLogContaining(java.lang.String) in  
>> org.apache.tools.ant.BuildFileTest; attempting to assign weaker  
>> access privileges; was public
>>     [javac]         protected void assertLogContaining(String  
>> substring) {
>>     [javac]                        ^
>>     [javac] /x1/gump/public/workspace/ant/src/testcases/org/apache/ 
>> tools/ant/types/selectors/ModifiedSelectorTest.java:927:  
>> assertOutputContaining(java.lang.String) in  
>> org.apache.tools.ant.types.selectors.ModifiedSelectorTest.BFT  
>> cannot override assertOutputContaining(java.lang.String) in  
>> org.apache.tools.ant.BuildFileTest; attempting to assign weaker  
>> access privileges; was public
>>     [javac]         protected void assertOutputContaining(String  
>> substring) {
>>     [javac]                        ^
>
> kevj got in first.
>
> Kevin, I think we could delete all these (duplicate) operations, as  
> they do nothing useful above what the superclass does. Do you  
> agree? Or do you know more about java method binding than I do...

I just took the less destructive way out, by leaving them in place  
but altering the access privilege to public, at least the code would  
still be there.  I agree that they seem to do nothing, and would be  
happy to remove them, but I wasn't sure that was the wise choice  
given that this code has been fine for a long time and has only  
broken recently.

+1 for removing useless methods in tests :)

Kev

--
"I call it the State where everyone, good or bad, is a poison- 
drinker: the State where universal slow suicide is called - life" -  
Friedrich Nietzsche


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org


Mime
View raw message