Andrew Zhang wrote:
On 4/17/06, Anton Avtamonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, not completely agree. I RI has BUG, I agree to have
corresponding Harmony test failing. However do you think that
different exception messges say is a good reason to have failures? I
don't think so. Just a minor differemce which can be 'formally
documented' by using isHarmony() is tests.
I agree with you that different exception messages are not failures. So in
my opnion, we'd better avoid such test cases.
If some exception messages are really very important to developers ( I don't
have any idea about such Exception classes),
I think RI should contain similiar information so that we can write some
test cases, which both RI and Harmony could pass, by verifying keywords
instead.
If "isHarmony()" is used, then what's the expected message? I don't think
there's a "Harmony exception message spec" :-)
Yes, and another problem is that it is hard to tell if the tests are currently
running on Harmony or RI, even harder than to tell the platforms.
However I think Avtamonov's idea is professional, although a bit complex. :)
After all, the tests, currently in Harmony, put all tests for one class in one
testcase file and all tests for one method in one test method, that's why it
seems write try{fail()}catch{//correct} is rather easy, right? :)
People may argue which message is best or more meanfuling :)
Wishes,
--
Anton Avtamonov,
Intel Middleware Products Division
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Andrew Zhang
China Software Development Lab, IBM
--
Best Regards!
Jimmy, Jing Lv
China Software Development Lab, IBM
