harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nathan Beyer" <ndbe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [classlib][test] Migration to testNG?
Date Fri, 13 Jun 2008 05:29:15 GMT
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Sean Qiu <sean.xx.qiu@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2008/6/12 Sian January <sianjanuary@googlemail.com>:
> > This is slightly off track, but my concern about TestNG is that there are
> > already quite a lot of steps for someone new to Harmony to get the source
> > code and run the tests (both for the whole of Harmony and for a single
> class
> > library module).  Certainly for Eclipse users if we switched to TestNG
> this
> > would add another step, although I'm not sure about command-line users.
> >
>
> The cost to make use of current tests is low, IMHO.
> I have mentioned that we can add TestNG target to replace Junit target.
> From the command-line users'  perspective, they still use the same
> command to run the test.
> The only difference would be the command will invoke TestNG to run our
> test.
> For Eclipse users, they can adopt plug-in for TestNG, it is quite the
> same as plug-in for junit.
> So I think we can migration to TestNG smoothly for the user.
> What's more, they can pick up their desired tests more conveniently.
>
> For test developers,  on the other hand, it is a little complex.
> But  we want to upgrade to a new tool, no matter Junit 4 or TestNG, we
> need to pay for it.Their efforts are similar.


Actually, we can use JUnit 4 now. If you run with Ant 1.7 and put the JUnit
4 library that's in the dependency download already into your Ant classpath,
JUnit 4 tests will run. You can even mix JUnit 3 and 4 tests in the same run
and it works fine, so new test classes can be built at JUnit 4 tests without
having to update any existing test code. You can even use some of the
minimal built-in hamcrest matchers, as they are part of the JUnit 4.4 JAR.

-Nathan


>
> For TestNG, we need add annotations for each testcase, classify them
> to right groups.
> The good news is we still can use original assert* as before since
> TestNG include JUnit's Assert class.
> As Nathan mentioned , we can use hamcrest as well if we want.
>
>
>
> > Of course if switching to TestNG solves some really major problems then
> it
> > would probably be worth it, but the only thing I can see that it gives us
> > over JUnit 4 is being able to run different sets of tests on different
> OS's
> > and to me that doesn't seem as important as having a project that's easy
> to
> > access.  Just my 2p worth...
> >
>
> We can replace the exclude files  to get a more accurate tracking for
> failed test.
> We can tell difference between public API tests and harmony specific
> implementation tests .
> We can archive all tests together into a jar.
> I think there should be other benefits as well :)
>
>
> --
> Best Regards
> Sean, Xiao Xia Qiu
>
> China Software Development Lab, IBM
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message