Am 26.01.2012 10:28, schrieb Simone Tripodi:
Hi Benedikt!
Hi Simo
don't get crazy with Assertions.* methods, they are just internal shortcuts!
okay, I'll just finish my general refactoring and ignore the very
special cases.
OTOH I would focus the attention on public methods to invoke methods
via reflection, that would be really more useful.
consider it done ;-)
There are two additional things that I have in mind:
- we should try to get some more structure into the project. For example
we could create packages for Bean*, Class* and Argument* Interfaces and
classes.
- it would be helpful, if you could give a very short overview over the
general architecture you have in mind. I have read through the source
code, but I'm not quite sure if I get the overall design idea. Also, if
there are implementations that you think are missing, please just let me
know what you have in mind, so I can create a patch.
Thanks for your efforts!
no problem, atm it is a lot of fun for me, and I'm learning a lot.
-Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/
http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/
http://twitter.com/simonetripodi
http://www.99soft.org/
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Benedikt Ritter
<b...@systemoutprintln.de> wrote:
Hi,
I'm refactoring AssertionsTest to match the discussed best practices. I
wrote a test method for checkArgument(boolean Argument, String
errorTemplate, Object.. errorArgs):
@Test( expected = NullPointerException.class )
public void checkArgumentFalseStringNull()
{
checkArgument( false, ERROR_MSG, (Object[]) null );
}
The javadoc for checkArgument is:
@throws NullPointerException if the check fails and either {@code
errorMessageTemplate} or {@code errorMessageArgs} is null (don't let
this happen)
but when I execute the test, it fails because I'm getting an
IllegalStateException (instead of the expected NPE). Although this is
expected if false is passed in, it violates the contract described in the
javadoc. I'm not sure what to do now. I could either change the
implementation of checkArgument to throw the correct exception if errorArgs
is null or change the javadoc (remove the second part of the throws
declaration).
I would prefer the latter. But then one thing has to be paid attention to:
If we call checkArgument(false, ERROR_MSG) and ERROR_MSG contains any
placeholders ("%s") and there are no errorArgs given, a
java.util.MissingArgumentFormatException will be thrown. So we would have to
deal with that.
Any thoughts?
All the best
Benedikt
PS: this also applies to checkState(boolean state, String errorTemplate,
Object... errorArgs)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
