harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Geir Magnusson Jr <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [result] Re: [vote] Acceptance of HARMONY-39 : Contribution of beans, regex and math class library code
Date Tue, 21 Mar 2006 14:17:11 GMT


Richard Liang wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>> Good unit tests are going to be testing things that are package 
>> protected.  You can't do that if you aren't in the same package 
>> (obviously).  With the "custom" of putting in things in o.a.h.t are we 
>> implicitly discouraging good testing practice?  Given that this 
>> o.a.h.t.* pattern comes from Eclipse-land, how do they do it?  I 
>> couldn't imagine that the Eclipse tests don't test package protected 
>> things.
>>
> Hello Geir,
> 
> Maybe we should have two types of test suites:
> 1. Test for APIs including public and protected methods which could be 
> run against different Java SE implementations.

Yep

> ==>> If we want to test a protected method of a class, we could mock a 
> subclass of this class. And write test case against the subclass. 
> (Protected methods are accessible to subclass)

That's actually different but interesting.

> 
> 2. Test for internal implementation which may include tests for package 
> private methods and tests for other internal-used classes.
> ==>>We must put the tests into the same package if we want to test 
> package private methods of a class.

Yes

> 
> These are just some rough thinking ;-) Any comments? Thanks a lot.

I wonder if we're unique in this situation.  We may be, given we need to 
test the things that 99.9999% of the world depends on having right and 
working.

We also have the problem that testing w/in a VM makes assumptions about 
the VM correctness, which we can't tell right now :)

geir



>> I've been short of Round Tuits lately, but I still would like to 
>> investigate a test harness that helps us by mitigating the security 
>> issues...
>>
>> geir
>>
>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>> I thought the crucial thing was that tests should be in a separate
>>> namespace not in the namespace of the package they are testing (at
>>> least not unless it was absolutely necessary).
>>> -Mark.
>>>
>>> On 3/20/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> I'm doing it now.
>>>>
>>>> I need to go back and stare at our discussion on test setup, because 
>>>> I'm
>>>>   still not a raving fan of o.a.h.test....
>>>>
>>>> geir
>>>>
>>>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>>>> Don't worry, you'd have to be less subtle for me to take something 
>>>>> as criticism.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've had an attempt at moving beans out - HARMONY-218.  If that gets
>>>>> committed I'll do the other too.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Mark.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/20/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>>> That wasn't a criticism, btw.  It seemed like a natural thing to

>>>>>> do when
>>>>>> I first saw it, but when I was actually dealing w/ it, my opinion

>>>>>> changed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yah, split away!  That was going to be my next question, how to 
>>>>>> split..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Mark Hindess wrote:
>>>>>>> Fair enough.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mind if I redo the script/patch to split the three modules to
match
>>>>>>> the structure of the others?  That is, into separate modules/math,
>>>>>>> modules/beans, modules/regex directories?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>  Mark.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/20/06, Geir Magnusson Jr <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I just committed.  There was some delay because of a missing

>>>>>>>> CCLA.  Sorry.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've committed the code as is from the JIRA.  I'm going to
do 
>>>>>>>> some basic
>>>>>>>> cleanup and then look at hte patches to integrate.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looking at this (and 88?) I think that this "add patches"

>>>>>>>> approach is a
>>>>>>>> bad one, because it complicates what this JIRA is now.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the future, I think we should just create new JIRA's for

>>>>>>>> add-ons (if
>>>>>>>> the add-on contributor isn't the contributor of the original

>>>>>>>> JIRA) and
>>>>>>>> just link them so they are easy to keep track of...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Richard Liang wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Despite a touch of trouble with the packaging of
the 
>>>>>>>>>> contribution, it
>>>>>>>>>> passed with flying colors ( or 'colours', for our
UK friends...)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +1 from :
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Geir
>>>>>>>>>> Stefano
>>>>>>>>>> Dims
>>>>>>>>>> Tim
>>>>>>>>>> Leo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In it comes....
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I have received the ACQs and the BCC for Harmony-39,
so I can 
>>>>>>>>>>> assert
>>>>>>>>>>> that the critical provenance paperwork is in
order (although 
>>>>>>>>>>> not in
>>>>>>>>>>> SVN yet).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Please vote to accept or reject this codebase
into the Apache 
>>>>>>>>>>> Harmony
>>>>>>>>>>> class library :
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] + 1 Accept
>>>>>>>>>>> [ ] -1 Reject  (provide reason below
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Lets let this run 3 days unless a) someone states
they need 
>>>>>>>>>>> more time
>>>>>>>>>>> or b) we get all committer votes before then.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Go...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> geir
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello Geir,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As this contribution has been accepted for a long time,
I'm 
>>>>>>>>> wondering
>>>>>>>>> when the source code could be put into Harmony SVN.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm working on the implementation of java.text.DecimalFormat

>>>>>>>>> which has
>>>>>>>>> enhancements on BigDecimal and BigInteger support. Now
I just 
>>>>>>>>> use this
>>>>>>>>> contribution as external jars in Eclipse.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>> Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com>
>>>>>>> IBM Java Technology Centre, UK.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com>
>>>>> IBM Java Technology Centre, UK.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Mark Hindess <mark.hindess@googlemail.com>
>>> IBM Java Technology Centre, UK.
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message