On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:10:15 GMT, Patrick Concannon <pconcan...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Great work, Conor. The test looks much better! > > Did you consider using testNG? Might help you condense things a bit more Thanks @pconcannon! I definitely do prefer testNG but was keen not to venture any further away from the scope of the fix than I may already have done with the other modifications. So with that in mind I tried to maintain the same test behavior i.e. throw a RuntimeException on failure instead of some sort of testNG assertion error. That being said, I am open to updating the test further to make use of testNG if additional feedback warrants it. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/1076
