harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Tony Wu" <wuyue...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] JUnit consistency, practices
Date Tue, 05 Dec 2006 02:16:26 GMT
Agree! When I tried harmony on some applications, I found it is very
hard to run the test of application mainly because there is no
instruction for that at all. So I think it is also not very easy for
user who have interest to run tests of harmony. And a good instruction
may be good for having many user's help to run harmony tests on
various platforms.

On 12/4/06, Oliver Deakin <oliver.deakin@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps some kind of "How To Run The Classlib Tests" section on
> the website would be useful? (Assuming there isn't already one with
> this information in) Then none of us would have to remember - it
> would be right there to copy/paste :)
>
> Regards,
> Oliver
>
>
> Ivan Popov wrote:
> > Alexei,
> >
> > I agree that it is still possible to run JUnit tests from command line
> > even without having main() in the code. But I think it is easier to
> > run test by convenient way
> >
> >  $ java -cp junit.jar TestClass
> >
> > rather than in a more complex manner
> >
> >  $ java -cp junit.jar junit.textui.TestRunner TestClass
> >
> > Actually, I constantly forget the right spelling of the full class
> > name for TestRunner class and have to look into JUnit doc to specify
> > proper name for such a command line. Also, it would be inconvenient if
> > someone runs test from an IDE that does not support JUnit environment,
> > but launches test as a usual Java application.
> >
> > I don't insist on adding main() to each JUnit testcase, but I see no
> > reason for removing this functionality from those test where it
> > already exists.
> >
> > Thanks.
> > Ivan
> >
> > On 11/29/06, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedotov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Ivan, Stepan,
> >>
> >> I personally set +1 for removing main() method. Any script or command
> >> line can be trivially modified to launch JUnit tests without main()
> >> method: one should just add junit.textui.TestRunner class before a
> >> test class name.
> >>
> >> $ java -cp junit.jar junit.textui.TestRunner TestClass
> >>
> >> I'm writing this trivial thing here because during our work on class
> >> library test enabling it was FAQ N1 for all C/C++ developers.
> >>
> >> Note, any JUnit test won't work without junit.jar anyway. If you have
> >> junit.jar, you have a standard test runner, which is also quite
> >> lightweight.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thank you,
> >> Alexei
> >>
> >> On 11/29/06, Ivan Popov <ivan.g.popov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > -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
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Oliver Deakin
> IBM United Kingdom Limited
>
>


-- 
Tony Wu
China Software Development Lab, IBM

Mime
View raw message