Is that the reason you moved to this style of coding? I don't plan to
use ExpectedException or that style of testing in code that I write. Are
you going to keep overriding such commits?
-Jaikiran
On 15/08/18 1:18 PM, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote:
> Jaikiran,
>
> your code allowed for false positiv
On 15/08/18 12:41 PM, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote:
> I believe we discussed writing tests before. It is not a matter of style,
> but of keeping assumptions and assertions explicit.
Which assumption are you talking about? Can you use the current commit
to explain it?
> You replaced a JUnit 4 asse
Jaikiran,
your code allowed for false positives, too
Gintas
On Wed, 15 Aug 2018 at 09:11, Gintautas Grigelionis
wrote:
> I believe we discussed writing tests before. It is not a matter of style,
> but of keeping assumptions and assertions explicit.
> You replaced a JUnit 4 assertion with some
I believe we discussed writing tests before. It is not a matter of style,
but of keeping assumptions and assertions explicit.
You replaced a JUnit 4 assertion with some code that works, but is far from
being clear.
There is a reason why JUnit provides specialised assert... methods and you
could hav
Gintas,
On 14/08/18 10:14 PM, gin...@apache.org wrote:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/ant/blob/e648224f/src/tests/junit/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/email/EmailTaskTest.java
> --
> diff --git
> a/src/tests/junit/org/a
