beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew McCulloch" <amccu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Netui compiler bvts
Date Thu, 06 Jul 2006 21:58:51 GMT
Thanks for looking Carlin, I will look into the issue as well.  I was mainly
focused on the order of validation between fields, I did not look into the
order rules are applied for a single field.

On 7/6/06, Carlin Rogers <carlin.rogers@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks for the patch. Appreciate the contribution. The fix for
> BEEHIVE-1118
> looks good. There was one minor issue I came across for the diff of the
> generated validation xml files and the expected results. When I run your
> test I get a difference in the ordering of the <msg> elements associated
> to
> a field rule. Looking at the code, the rules are stored in an ArrayList
> and
> we just iterate through them when writing the xml file... so I'm not sure
> yet why there's a difference with your expected result, but can look into
> it.
>
> Carlin
>
> On 7/5/06, Andrew McCulloch <amccullo@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Carlin, the work went a bit quicker than I had anticipated...  I just
> > attached a patch to BEEHIVE-1118 in JIRA that always diffs the
> > pageflow-validation files.  It doesn't look like any of the other
> compiler
> > bvts are using validation so no additional tests had to be
> > modified.  Please
> > take a look whenever you have a chance.
> >
> > On 7/5/06, Andrew McCulloch <amccullo@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks Carlin.  I will move forward with the intent of always diffing
> > the
> > > pageflow validation config files.  With a little luck I should have a
> > patch
> > > by tomorrow for you to review.
> > >
> > > --Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > > On 6/30/06, Carlin Rogers <carlin.rogers@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for looking at this Andrew! Appreciate your contributions.
> > > >
> > > > My vote would be to always diff the generated page flow validation
> > > > files.
> > > >
> > > > Carlin
> > > >
> > > > On 6/30/06, Andrew McCulloch < amccullo@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >     I am working on a patch for BEEHIVE-1118 which involves the
> > order
> > > > that
> > > > > form validations are performed.  The bug looks like it comes down
> to
> > > > the
> > > > > way
> > > > > the pageflow-validation-*.xml file is generated.  In addition to
> the
> > > > three
> > > > > testRecorder drts that need to change with this fix I am writing
a
> > new
> > > > > compiler bvt test case.
> > > > >
> > > > >     Currently the compiler bvts only diff the struts-config*.xml
> > files
> > > >
> > > > > against expected results.  I have a patch to the JUnit class that
> > > > performs
> > > > > the file comparisons to make diffing the generated validation
> files
> > > > > mandatory (like he struts config files are), however, I wanted to
> > know
> > > > if
> > > > > this is the best choice.  It would also be easy to modify the test
> > to
> > > > only
> > > > > diff the file if an expected result file is present.  This would
> > only
> > > > miss
> > > > > the case where a validation file is generated unnecessarily.  It
> > would
> > > >
> > > > > however avoid changing the other compiler bvts that may use Jpf
> > > > validation
> > > > > annotations already.  Alternatively I could add some sort of flag
> or
> > > > > properties file to trigger the diffing of the validation files
> only
> > > > when
> > > > > desired.  This choice would be extensible and be easily adjusted
> to
> > > > > handled
> > > > > any other generated files.
> > > > >
> > > > >     If this seems like a worthwhile change to the netui compiler
> > bvts
> > > > I
> > > > > would like to hear how others think it would be best to handle
> > > > this.  My
> > > > > initial thought is that it would be best to always diff the
> pageflow
> > > > > validation files.
> > > > >
> > > > > --Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message