> ran tene wrote: > > there is a wide gap between the documented english writen contract of the > ComponentManager and ComponentSelctor and its > implementation - the implementation is much wider. > the writen contract is only one possible way of using the classes. > when i wrote the unit tests i faced this problem. > which contract should i check? > 1-the english one. > 2-the code. > option 1 makes the unit test more helpfull for peaople who wants to learn how > the code was > meant to be used. -part of the documentation. > what is the real contract of the classes? > this time i checked the code contract- option 2 ,but im not sure ...
The documented contract is what is necessary. If the implementation is too broad, then we may need to narrow it. > > ... > ran > > > Name: > DefaultComponentSelectorTestCase.java > DefaultComponentSelectorTestCase.java Type: Java Class (java/*) > Encoding: quoted-printable > > Name: > DefaultComponentManagerTestCase.java > DefaultComponentManagerTestCase.java Type: Java Class (java/*) > Encoding: quoted-printable > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
