harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib] Unit and performance testing
Date Wed, 25 Jan 2006 12:28:48 GMT
+1

Anton Avtamonov wrote:
> On 1/25/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
>> One more reason when logs are necessary:
>>
>> If testing is possible in some configurations only
>> (like set of providers contains something or default encoding is ...), then
>> 1) build failing in all different configs would be annoying
>> 2) One has to be able to scan logs for warnings to verify that
>> functionality is tested
>> when the config is as expected
>>
>> A different exit status for the tests that can test in the given
>> configuration would
>> help.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mikhail
>>
> 
> Well, I didn't say that using of logging in some particular case in a
> test is absolutely terrible. What I'm talking about is that in general
> (i.e. in the 99,9% cases) we should use standard JUnit features, try
> to keep each test small and clear. Using only JUnit asserts is a
> common approach and I beleive the major part of community does so...
> I agree that if you have to 'try' several classes/providers/what_ever
> in the test (since you absolutely CANNOT build the required
> environment from the test case and have to find an approprite test
> scenario instead) it is good chance to log which env. settings you met
> and which scenario was tested. However I hope that the majority of the
> tests can build the required environment for the tested scenario.
> 
> --
> Anton Avtamonov,
> Intel Middleware Products Division
> 

-- 

Tim Ellison (t.p.ellison@gmail.com)
IBM Java technology centre, UK.

Mime
View raw message