jakarta-cactus-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vincent Massol" <vmas...@pivolis.com>
Subject RE: begin(...) and end(...) methods
Date Wed, 17 Sep 2003 05:50:22 GMT
Hi Jason / Magnus,

My only worry is that the WebResponse will probably not be valid and the
main goal of end()/endXXX() are to verify it...

I'm not opposed to implementing what you say, but this is changing the
current goal of the end() method. Can you give me a use case where it is
needed? Why can't you do your cleanup in tearDown() as you would do with
any JUnit test case (and a Cactus test is a JUnit test case)?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Vinton [mailto:eccebonum@hotmail.com]
> Sent: 17 September 2003 02:17
> To: cactus-user@jakarta.apache.org
> Subject: begin(...) and end(...) methods
> In the "Writing Tests" section of the cactus site there is a section
> reads:
> Step 5 (optional): begin() and end() methods
>     begin(...) and end(...) methods are the client side equivalent of
> setUp() and a tearDown() methods (see previous step). They are called
> the
> client side, before and after every test.
>     The begin() and end() methods are optional.
> I've observed that when the test fails, the end() method is not
> It's unclear to me if this is a bug or by design.  I'm not sure if
this is
> a
> shared opinion, but I believe that it would be very helpful to have a
> method
> on the client side that is always called to do clean-up.
> Jason Vinton
> Moody's
> _________________________________________________________________
> Fast, faster, fastest: Upgrade to Cable or DSL today!
> https://broadband.msn.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cactus-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: cactus-user-help@jakarta.apache.org

View raw message