harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nathan Beyer" <ndbe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r691476 - in /harmony/enhanced/classlib/trunk/modules/concurrent: build.xml make/hyproperties.xml
Date Fri, 05 Sep 2008 03:26:38 GMT
I'd give these tests the benefit of doubt for the moment and assume if
they're failing, then perhaps something's not quite right in Harmony.
These tests are straight from the concurrency developer's themselves.
I haven't had a chance to run the tests against the RI, but that's
probably the next thing to do to make sure these are good tests.

-Nathan

On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:16 PM, chunrong lai <chunronglai@gmail.com> wrote:
>    Thanks. I see it is OK to just exclude the tests.
>    On the other hand the failure looks not simply from the tests because
> different testcases break in different platforms (but all Uncaught exception
> in similar categories). I just wonder if it exposes some issues in exception
> handling/testing.
>
>    public void threadShouldThrow() {
>        threadFailed = true;
>        fail("should throw exception");
>    }
>    public void run() {
>        try {
>           lock.lockInterruptibly();
>           threadShouldThrow();
>        } catch(InterruptedException success){}
>    }
>
>    Sorry or the confusion.
>
> On 9/5/08, Nathan Beyer <ndbeyer@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> I mentioned it in another thread, so it may have gone unnoticed.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > chunrong lai wrote:
>> >> hi, Nathan:
>> >>     I see the commit breaks some classlib test, include
>> ReentrantLockTest,
>> >> AbstractQueuedSynchronizerTest, ExecutorsTest and ScheduledExecutorTest,
>> as
>> >> reported in the integrity testing. Do we need a check?
>> >>    One can reproduce the error in the directory of working_classlib: ant
>> >> -Dtest.jre.home=...\drlvm\...\jdk\jre -Dtest.case=ReentrantLockTest
>> test.
>> >>     Thanks.
>> >
>> > In Nathan's defense, he didn't break anything but simply enabled tests
>> > that we should have been running.  Maybe these need JIRAs and adding to
>> > the exclude list until somebody steps forward to address them.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Tim
>> >
>> >
>>
>

Mime
View raw message