ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Loughran <>
Subject Re: Support for JUnit 4?
Date Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:16:51 GMT
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006, Joe Schmetzer <> wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 February, 2006 11:59 am, Steve Loughran wrote:
>>> Having looked at the junit4, I dont see the point in the annotated
>>> design.
>>> by backing away from having a base class, they have to jump through
>>> lots of hoops to make everything work, hoops they have only
>>> themselves to blame.
>> Without claiming to understand the considerations that went into the
>> design of JUnit4, I get the feeling that it is a response to TestNG,
>> which relies entirely upon annotations for tagging test methods.
> I beg to differ.  TestNG and JUnit 4 are both responses to NUnit 2. 8-)
> Given that Kent Beck is quoted on the NUnit page, praising the
> "idiomatic design", I'd say JUnit 4 is just adapting this idiomatic
> design to Java 5.
> I've been using NUnit quite a lot and like the annotations way to do
> things.
> [Ignore("would currently fail because of the changes if foo")]
> public void SomeTest() ...
> says so much more than
> public void XtestSomeTest() ...

true, but then

	text="not in a transaction")

would be even better, as we are declaring not only is this something we 
know about, but that we expect it to fail in a known way, and want to be 
notified if it changes.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message