Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mloenko@gmail.com designates
 64.233.182.187 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=lEl/SYBWO/qQoZ3zmQ4KmxoxMeE34NPAk4HdjLTsjPpuYVVslflPYJD766xV2IXBYyxvPh4QKflus7491Jf+yM2D+GM+gMyAGqPIakwXIfV3u25+r1AAfo4ExtBBLVYrbyVxR77xE2ttj0rWT4QFM/Arc06RCV2Ckr+ykyOitwI=
Message-ID: <906dd82e0611241956x144925e9q4da2ddf8d9e210a4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 09:56:36 +0600
From: "Mikhail Loenko" <mloenko@gmail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [classlib][test] isHarmony method in the swing tests
In-Reply-To: <2c9597b90611240708mc90e91dm110a7057e456a413@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <8E389A5F2FEABA4CB1DEC35A25CB39CE78367A@mssmsx411>
	 <2c9597b90611240708mc90e91dm110a7057e456a413@mail.gmail.com>

2006/11/24, Alexei Zakharov <alexei.zakharov@gmail.com>:
> I agree that it is convenient but someone needs to waste his/her time
> on it. IMHO making any test passing on RI at any conditions is a
> rather strange effort unless you are going to sell your test suite to
> Sun. Moreover, it will complicate the test logic.

+1

Thanks,
Mikhail


>
> Thanks,
>
> 2006/11/24, Ivanov, Alexey A <alexey.a.ivanov@intel.com>:
> > >-----Original Message-----
> > >From: Alexei Zakharov [mailto:alexei.zakharov@gmail.com]
> > >Sent: Friday, November 24, 2006 5:23 PM
> > >To: dev@harmony.apache.org
> > >Subject: Re: [classlib][test] isHarmony method in the swing tests
> > >
> > >> If Harmony implementation is more reasonable, it's ok to write a test
> > >> which passes against Harmony while breaks RI.
> > >
> > >I also do not completely understand why we should force our tests to
> > >pass on RI even if we have non-bug-diff JIRAs filed. There are a lot
> > >of tests in our classlib repository that fail on RI.
> >
> > IMHO, it's just more convenient: all tests should pass both on Harmony
> > and RI.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alexey.
> >
> > >
> > >Thanks,
> > >
> > >2006/11/23, Andrew Zhang <zhanghuangzhu@gmail.com>:
> > >> On 11/23/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Why we expect different exceptions? I think this test
> > >> > discovers incompatibility and should be just fixed to expect the
> > same
> > >> > exception
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Agree. If Harmony implementation is more reasonable, it's ok to write
> > a
> > >test
> > >> which passes against Harmony while breaks RI. And actually there're
> > so
> > >many
> > >> such tests existings in current code, and we mark it as "Non
> > difference
> > >bug
> > >> from RI".  So IMO, making test pass on both Harmony and RI makes no
> > sense.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> > Mikhail
> > >> >
> > >> > 2006/11/23, Ivanov, Alexey A <alexey.a.ivanov@intel.com>:
> > >> > > Yeah, I remember about TestNG. Yet I think it won't solve all the
> > >cases
> > >> > > where isHarmony used.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > For example, look at the tests in
> > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2198
> > >> > > The isHarmony() method is used in if-else context there which
> > >> > > demonstrates the difference between Harmony and RI. And mostly it
> > is
> > >> > > if-else context that isHarmony() is used.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Regards,
> > >> > > --
> > >> > > Alexey A. Ivanov
> > >> > > Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > >-----Original Message-----
> > >> > > >From: Mikhail Loenko [mailto:mloenko@gmail.com]
> > >> > > >Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 2:39 PM
> > >> > > >To: dev@harmony.apache.org
> > >> > > >Subject: Re: [classlib][test] isHarmony method in the swing
> > tests
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >We are going to swith to TestNG.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >So we will be able to handle all that stuff there, won't we?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >Thanks,
> > >> > > >Mikhail
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >2006/11/23, Ivanov, Alexey A <alexey.a.ivanov@intel.com>:
> > >> > > >> Mikhail,
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> Here it's not a temporary solution.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> javax.swing.text.PlainViewI18N is for bidirectional text
> > support.
> > >It
> > >> > > is
> > >> > > >> a package-private class, and it's not present in public API
> > spec.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> Sun doesn't reveal its implementation of bidirectional text. I
> > >guess
> > >> > > >> it's fully implemented yet: there are problems with it. What I
> > can
> > >> > > >> remember at once is you can't go through all the text using
> > right
> > >or
> > >> > > >> left arrows on keyboard because the caret jumps back.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> In general this method is used to differentiate our
> > implementation
> > >> > > from
> > >> > > >> Sun. These differences are intentional. To make the tests pass
> > >both
> > >> > > on
> > >> > > >> RI and Harmony, it is checked which classlib is used. Also
> > looking
> > >at
> > >> > > >> the tests one sees the expected difference.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> Regards,
> > >> > > >> Alexey.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> P.S. We can get rid of using this method and sort out the
> > tests to
> > >> > > >> separate implementation specific tests, but it requires lots
> > of
> > >> > > effort.
> > >> > > >> On the other hand, some tests will lose the information about
> > the
> > >> > > >> difference. Subsequent releases of Java may change the
> > behavior
> > >and
> > >> > > >> we'll see it because of failing tests. This way we can adjust
> > our
> > >> > > >> implementation to the new RI impl.
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> --
> > >> > > >> Alexey A. Ivanov
> > >> > > >> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> >-----Original Message-----
> > >> > > >> >From: Mikhail Loenko [mailto:mloenko@gmail.com]
> > >> > > >> >Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 10:22 AM
> > >> > > >> >To: dev@harmony.apache.org
> > >> > > >> >Subject: [classlib][test] isHarmony method in the swing tests
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> >Did I understand correctly that it's a temporary solution to
> > >> > > >> >differentiate between
> > >> > > >> >"api" and "impl" tests?
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> >package javax.swing.text;
> > >> > > >> ><...>
> > >> > > >> >public class PlainViewI18N_LineViewTest extends SwingTestCase
> > {
> > >> > > >> ><...>
> > >> > > >> >    public void testGetPreferredSpan01() throws Exception {
> > >> > > >> >        if (!isHarmony()) {
> > >> > > >> >            return;
> > >> > > >> >        }
>
> --
> Alexei Zakharov,
> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
>