Hello again! I just noticed that my unit tests are written with Junit4 and the tests in Collections use Junit5. Might it be the culprit for ignoring my unit tests even if the test methods are annotated with @Test ?
Best regards, rodde ________________________________ Lähettäjä: Efremov, Rodion <[email protected]> Lähetetty: lauantai 6. joulukuuta 2025 17.50 Vastaanottaja: Commons Developers List <[email protected]> Kopio: sebb <[email protected]> Aihe: VS: [COLLECTIONS] JMH benchmark results for IndexedLinkedList vs. ExtendedTreeList Hello! I just made a PR #664 (branch: add-indexed-linked-list) that contains my list implementation, ExtendedTreeList (for JMH benchmarking), the actual JMH benchmark, and a couple of unit test files. My current issue is that on my local PC I cannot make the Collections to run my unit tests. Any advice would be nice to get. Best regards, rodde ________________________________ Lähettäjä: Gary Gregory <[email protected]> Lähetetty: lauantai 6. joulukuuta 2025 15.52 Vastaanottaja: Commons Developers List <[email protected]> Kopio: sebb <[email protected]> Aihe: Re: [COLLECTIONS] JMH benchmark results for IndexedLinkedList vs. ExtendedTreeList On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 8:50 AM Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 8:38 AM Efremov, Rodion > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hello! > > > > My bad. Could you try that one: > > > > [email protected] > > Yep, that one works. Thank you. I'll run the benchmarks later today. Oh, wait, I'm confusing this thread with another. Where are the benchmarks? It should be simpler to create a PR at this point. Thank you, Gary > > Gary > > > > > ? > > > > Best regards, > > rodde > > ________________________________ > > Lähettäjä: sebb <[email protected]> > > Lähetetty: lauantai 6. joulukuuta 2025 15.10 > > Vastaanottaja: Commons Developers List <[email protected]> > > Aihe: Re: [COLLECTIONS] JMH benchmark results for IndexedLinkedList vs. > > ExtendedTreeList > > > > On Sat, 6 Dec 2025 at 13:04, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2025 at 7:41 AM Efremov, Rodion > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello Gary, > > > > > > > > As far as I recall, I have already signed the agreement years ago. > > > > > > Hi rodde, > > > > > > If you used [email protected] in your paperwork, we don't > > > have it. Did you use a different email address? > > > > If you don't wish to reveal the email address on this list, feel free > > to send it to the commons private list instead of dev > > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > rodde > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Lähettäjä: Gary Gregory <[email protected]> > > > > Lähetetty: lauantai 6. joulukuuta 2025 13.28 > > > > Vastaanottaja: Commons Developers List <[email protected]> > > > > Aihe: Re: [COLLECTIONS] JMH benchmark results for IndexedLinkedList vs. > > > > ExtendedTreeList > > > > > > > > Hello Rodion, > > > > > > > > I think we need you to sign a Contributor Agreement before we can > > > > proceed > > > > with your contribution. Please see > > > > https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html > > > > > > > > Thank you! > > > > Gary > > > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 6, 2025, 02:33 Efremov, Rodion <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello, community! > > > > > > > > > > In the attachments, you may find a text file summarizing the JMH > > > > > benchmark > > > > > of my IndexedLinkedList vs. ExtendedTreeList [1]. It turned out that > > > > > my > > > > > list implementation easily outperforms [1]. > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? Should I do a PR? > > > > > > > > > > References: > > > > > [1] > > > > > https://github.com/coderodde/IndexedLinkedList/blob/main/src/main/java/io/github/coderodde/util/ExtendedTreeList.java > > > > > > > > > > PS. ExtendedTreeList is a subclass of TreeList that implements some > > > > > essential missing methods such as subList(..., ...).clear() and so on. > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
