cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Benson Margulies" <bim2...@basistech.com>
Subject RE: Junit 4 versus us
Date Tue, 20 Nov 2007 22:34:17 GMT
@BeforeClass requires a static method. I'm trying to make a Junit4
replacement for the AbstractDependencyInjecting.... class from Spring,
which is Junit 3, and doesn't support @Ignore on tests. A static method,
of course, can't be overidden. So, I ended up with an @Before that uses
a static boolean to get it done.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jiang, Ning (Willem) [mailto:Ning.Jiang@iona.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 4:57 PM
> To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Junit 4 versus us
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> @BeforeClass just can be added before the static public method.
> Maybe Benson want to do that thing in a non-static method.
> 
> Willem.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
> Sent: Wed 11/21/2007 5:33
> To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Benson Margulies
> Subject: Re: Junit 4 versus us
>  
> 
> Umm...  
> 
> Couldn't it be in a @BeforeClass annotated method?   Why have 
> the static 
> things?
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> On Monday 19 November 2007, Benson Margulies wrote:
> > And if one wants a protocol using overriden functions, one 
> has to have 
> > an @Before that uses a static boolean to make it run once.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Christopher Moesel [mailto:Christopher_Moesel@avid.com]
> > > Sent: Monday, November 19, 2007 7:26 AM
> > > To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: RE: Junit 4 versus us
> > >
> > > Yes, I've found that any code I want only to run once (per test 
> > > class) needs to go in a static block outside the 
> constructor.  That 
> > > way it only gets processed the first time the JVM loads the class.
> > >
> > > -Chris
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Benson Margulies [mailto:bim2007@basistech.com]
> > > Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2007 1:02 PM
> > > To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: Junit 4 versus us
> > >
> > >
> > > We have a fair number of junit tests that have code in their 
> > > constructor that should only be run once.
> > >
> > > Imagine my surprise to discover that this is really not a 
> good idea, 
> > > since JUnit reconstructs for each test function.
> 
> 
> 
> --
> J. Daniel Kulp
> Principal Engineer
> IONA
> P: 781-902-8727    C: 508-380-7194
> daniel.kulp@iona.com
> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message