harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Anton Avtamonov" <anton.avtamo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [testing] Re: AWT, Java2D and SWING contribution
Date Tue, 06 Jun 2006 06:23:00 GMT
On 6/2/06, Anton Avtamonov <anton.avtamonov@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/2/06, Erik Axel Nielsen <erikaxel@stud.ntnu.no> wrote:
> > >
> > > Actually my English is not good :-). Will work on improvement.
> > >
> > > What I tried to say is that we really don't need to use third-party
> > > L&Fs for visual testing. It doesn't mean we should not try them. We
> > > should! Just because L&F implementation is one of the most significant
> > > customization in Swing and may be based on the very internal things
> > > (like the order of components in some specific container, etc). So,
> > > running third-party applications which provide their own L&Fs will
> > > allow to determine many inconsistencies. Obviously, the more
> > > applications we  probe during testing the better fucntional coverage
> > > we achieve (and the more problems get identified).
> > >
> > > Talking about scenario automation: if I got your idea right, you
> > > proposed to use some third-party L&F. Just because this approach would
> > > allow unified look for both RI and Harmony.
> > > This is excellent idea, but third-party L&F could also provide not
> > > just own colors, but customized behavior as well, replacing our
> > > classes. That's why I think we should not used them.
> > > Your idea can be easily implemented by overriding color-related
> > > constants in L&F.
> > > What we need is just call:
> > > UIManager.put("someColorConstant", new ColorUIResource
> > > (PREDEFINED_COLOR))
> > > for all the color-related constants.
> > > This allows to test the standard set of L&F classes.
> >
> > Thanks a lot clearing this up for me Anton. I agree with most of your
> > views. However I think that using third party L&F in our testing
> > could help us isolate problems that are not in our own L&Fs but
> > rather in our implementation of the other parts of Swing/Awt/Java2D.
> > But as you say, we will have to find a L&F that overrides most if not
> > all of BasicLF and that could be a bigger problem than I though
> > originally.
>
> Yes, agree.
> If we want to test the underlying fucntionality completely isolated
> L&F would be nice. For instance, the fact that button changes its
> state to pressed/released is UI responsibility, however the fact that
> listeners are notified is the reposnsibility of ButtonModel. And the
> fact that mouse events are propoerly delivered is responsibility of
> event queue and dispatching machinery. So, replacing UI part we can
> test all event-processing layer for instance.
>
> Anyway I'll try third-party L&Fs you are pointed out just to look how
> it works with Harmony.

As I expected custom L&Fs are the most complecated tests for the Swing
fucntionality. I tried L&Fs you advised and even was able to run a
simple application with one of them with minor changes in Swing :-).
I'll continue my investigations. I hope I'll be able to provide some
patches when the original contribution appears in SVN.

Thank you,
-- 
Anton Avtamonov,
Intel Middleware Products Division

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message