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: [OT] Re: Unit testing revisited
Date Wed, 22 Mar 2006 13:11:57 GMT


Leo Simons wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2006 at 07:34:16AM -0500, Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
>>> LEO : 
>>> I'll point out that every time you restrict to an ordered sequence of
>>> taking care of things in an open souce community you do slow them down just
>>> a little (hey, that's an interesting assertion. Hmm. Should write a book
>>> about it I guess) so make sure its what you want :-).
>> Huh?
> 
> You didn't say "let us test the code in isolation [using a smart framework]",
> you said "let us test the code in isolation *first* [using a smart
> framework]". I need to write a book about why I think the difference
> matters, and it needs to be a book because I'll need many many words...

Oh - no, I didn't mean that. Sorry. All three are independent.  You can 
do them in parallel.  We can build our mechanism to do the 
implementation tests correctly while we continue to do everything else.

I just wanted to see if I could get through the fog and be clear what 
the issues are and stop confusing #1 and #2, both of which are important.

To test java.util.Foo, I believe it's important to have BOTH

     java.util.FooTest

AND

     org.apache.harmony.test.java.util.FooTest

as they are intended to test different things (the first as a 
'un-integrated' implementation test and the second as an 'in-situ' 
API/spec test).

If we agree on that and recognize that, I suspect the test debates will 
come to rapid closure, and we'll have a mini-roadmap of what we want to 
do in the testing area that is parallelizable and doesn't hold anyone up.

geir



Mime
View raw message