harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ivan Popov" <ivan.g.po...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] JUnit consistency, practices
Date Wed, 29 Nov 2006 08:23:47 GMT
-1 for removing main().

I often run individual tests from command line or using scripts and
it's easier to launch them as a usual Java application. Also, this
facilitates creating separate bundle with test to attach to a bug
report or send to other people, who can just run it from command line
or use script with the all required options already specified, instead
of setting IDE for this test.

Thanks.
Ivan

On 11/29/06, Nathan Beyer <nbeyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is a large amount of inconsistency across the tests and I'd like
> to lobby for cleaning them up as much as possible. I'm of the opinion
> that test code should be clean, simple and transparent. Here are some
> of the more noticeable items that I'd like to cleanup.
>
> * Empty setUp/teardown methods - There are a number of tests that
> override setUp and/or teardown methods, but are either empty or just
> call the super implementation.
>
> * Singleton suite methods - There are some tests that contain a static
> "suite" method that creates a TestSuite and adds one test (the test
> class it's declared in). Are there any practical uses for these
> methods? TestSuites are for grouping together tests to treat them as
> one unit. Since these suites are just one test, it doesn't seem to
> provide much value.
>
> * main method launching text runner - There are some tests that
> contain "main" methods which run the enclosing test via a JUnit text
> runner. Most IDEs have built-in support for JUnit and can launch any
> test arbitrarily and Ant can do the same thing. Does anyone launch
> tests via these methods?
>
> My proposal would be to clean up these inconsistencies by eliminating
> them, but what does everyone else think?
>
> -Nathan
>

Mime
View raw message