Hmm... sounds reasonable. ;) -Matt
--- Peter Reilly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> before/afterTests?
>
> Peter
>
>
> On 10/3/06, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/3/06, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > > JUnit 4 and TestNG have a Before/AfterClass
> conce
before/afterTests?
Peter
On 10/3/06, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 10/3/06, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> JUnit 4 and TestNG have a Before/AfterClass concept
> for expensive setup/tearDown applicable to most or all
> of a test class. AntUnit needs something simi
On 10/3/06, Matt Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
JUnit 4 and TestNG have a Before/AfterClass concept
for expensive setup/tearDown applicable to most or all
of a test class. AntUnit needs something similar;
e.g. before/after[File|Build|Resource|All]... I think
it's useful to retain the before/a
JUnit 4 and TestNG have a Before/AfterClass concept
for expensive setup/tearDown applicable to most or all
of a test class. AntUnit needs something similar;
e.g. before/after[File|Build|Resource|All]... I think
it's useful to retain the before/after nomenclature
for familiarity bred from JUnit 4 a
