axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Doug Davis" <...@us.ibm.com>
Subject RE: [GUMP] Function Test Failure - Axis
Date Thu, 21 Jun 2001 16:38:02 GMT
Isn't this what the XXX symbol stuff is for??
-Dug

Rob Jellinghaus <robj@unrealities.com> on 06/21/2001 12:31:41 PM

Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org

To:   axis-dev@xml.apache.org, axis-dev@xml.apache.org
cc:
Subject:  RE: [GUMP] Function Test Failure - Axis



At 09:29 AM 6/21/2001 -0400, Sam Ruby wrote:
>Rob Jellinghaus wrote:
>>
>> I tend to prefer this (fix the underlying problem in the test) to:
>
>So, that's why you commented out doTestIBM() instead of debugging the
>NullPointerException?

Hmm.  Oops.  You're right that doTestIBM() could have been fixed by making
it *able to handle a missing xmltoday.com server*.  Hadn't thought of that.
 I'd thought, "if xmltoday.com is offline, it means a test failure, which
is bogus because it's not our code that's failing."  Really a missing
xmltoday.com server should not result in a test failure.

It still rubs me the wrong way to have a test that may or may not work
completely, due to external (uncontrolled) factors... it'd be better to
have something like a *simulated* xmltoday.com server, so we could reliably
test the "xmltoday.com available" case *and* the "xmltoday.com unavailable"
case.  Otherwise, we wind up with a test that usually tests "xmltoday.com
available", but only when xmltoday.com is offline tests "xmltoday.com
unavailable".  And if we break failure handling in some way, we only find
out about it when xmltoday.com is offline *and* someone happens to run the
test at that moment.  Non-determinism in testing... blah!

Cheers,
Rob





Mime
View raw message