buildr-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Assaf Arkin" <ar...@intalio.com>
Subject Re: [buildr] Order of classpath for running tests
Date Tue, 08 Jul 2008 01:23:19 GMT
On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 3:46 AM, lacton <lacton@users.sourceforge.net>
wrote:

> That was fast! Thank you.
>
> I have a small improvement suggestion for the rspec part of the fix.
> Instead of using a file called 'test' in spec/test_spec.rb, what about
> a file called 'config.xml' or 'config.properties'? I think it would be
> a better example of what is usually found in the resources directory,
> just like you created java files in src/main/java/.


Good idea. Just made the change.

Assaf


>
>
> Regards.
>
> --
> Lacton
>
> On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 2:20 AM, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
> > Now in SVN.
> >
> > Assaf
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 10:54 AM, lacton <lacton@users.sourceforge.net>
> wrote:
> >> Assaf,
> >>
> >> I agree with you this risk exists.
> >>
> >> Personally, I try to use this kind of overriding mechanism as little
> >> as possible. I find it somewhat confusing to have two different files
> >> with exactly the same name. Relying on this, for me, is a design
> >> smell.
> >>
> >> Yet, when working with existing code, it can be an efficient way to
> >> start writing tests. Michael Feathers wrote extensively about it in
> >> Working Effectively with Legacy Code.
> >>
> >> Regards.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Lacton
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 7:15 PM, Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com> wrote:
> >>> Thinking about this a bit more.
> >>>
> >>> If test stuff comes first in the classpath, then tests can override
> >>> any file with the same name, could be configuration file, resource
> >>> file, even class implementation (e.g. to add tracing and debugging).
> >>> So there's obviously a benefit for this feature.
> >>>
> >>> But if test stuff comes first in the classpath, it could override any
> >>> file with the same name, and you end up testing with the wrong file.
> >>> You might get the tests to pass by fixing the test file, but not the
> >>> original file that everyone else uses.
> >>>
> >>> I have not seen a lot of instances of that happening, so I think the
> >>> utility of having tests override files with the same name, is
> >>> worthwhile doing.  Just wanted to make sure we realize there's a
> >>> downside to this.
> >>>
> >>> Assaf
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 9:33 AM, lacton <lacton@users.sourceforge.net>
> wrote:
> >>>> Assaf,
> >>>>
> >>>>>> The problem is that 'target/test/resources' comes after
> >>>>>> 'target/resources'. My tests are seeing the wrong property file.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> How would you tackle this issue?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> test.with test.resources.target
> >>>>>
> >>>>> this would add test.resources earlier in the classpath.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thank you. It now works exactly as I wanted.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Separately, I don't remember paying attention to this, so maybe
we
> >>>>> talk about what the right order should be, and if we're doing it
> >>>>> wrong, file an issue and fix it.
> >>>>
> >>>> I created issue BUILDR-88.
> >>>>
> >>>>> Would it be better for test classes/resources to come before compile
> >>>>> classes/resources so they load up earlier in the classpath?
> >>>>
> >>>> I think it would make sense, as it's the way maven works.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Lacton
>

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