Thanks Aklil !
I don't know what the problem really is. However, what I have started doing
last week is to try aspectj (AOP) with Cactus for 2 goals :
- intialise and automatically log entries and exits of methods (without
writing any code in the methods !)
- provide a foolproof runtime checking system, in order to diagnose and
report configuration problems.
Aspectj looks very promising to me !
Here is also an idea I've had for testing application (extracted from a mail
I sent on the jakarta general list) :
"One idea that I have for now is to use AOP to complement testing of
applications :
- we have unit testing with junit/cactus,
- we have functional testing with httpunit or others
- we are missing pattern testing ! And this could be done with aspectj. What
is pattern testing ? It will test the following kind of things :
- verify that any business method that is called as actually passed
through a controller (MVC model) first,
- verify that no JDBC code is used anywhere in the code except in such
class/method,
- verify threading,
- verify that log4j is used through a wrapper,
- ...
"
what do you think ? would you have such a need ?
-Vincent
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 6:24 AM
Subject: Re: VAJ 3.5.3 Class loader problem
>
>
> Vincent,
>
> Thanks for your reply. I am using JUnit 3.7. I was using JUnit 3.7 with
> Cactus version 1.1 also.
>
> As far as I could see from following the execution of my code the logging
> system is already initialised by the time runBare() is called.
>
> Cactus/JUnit seems to want the initialisation to occur when the declared
> methods of my custom test class are being gathered to identify which ones
> start with "test" (ie. getDeclaredMethods() call in
> junit.framework.TestSuite(Class)). If I don't add a static initialisation
> in AbstractHttpClient and NOW in WebResponse, I get the error ("Failed to
> invoke suite(): java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError").
>
> I had to add it to WebResponse because I realised that my endXXX() method
> was still the one from version 1.1 ie. with HttpURLConnection instead of
> WebResponse.
>
> It seems really strange to me that I get this error, since I would imagine
> that people are using Cactus 1.2 without any problems. But I have really
> run out of ideas as to why this is occurring! I have attached the call
> sequence as I stepped through the code, indicating where the error occurs
> without the initialisation.
>
> Regards
> Aklil
>
> (See attached file: junit 'n' cactus - how they work.doc)
>
>
>
> "Vincent Massol"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> cc:
> 21/10/2001 05:58 AM Subject: Re: VAJ 3.5.3 Class
loader problem
> Please respond to
> "Vincent Massol"
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Aklil,
>
> Thanks for your 2 detailed and interesting emails. Yes, there are 2 sides
> to
> cactus : one client and one server (2 JVMs) and there are 2 log files :
one
> for the client side and one for the server side, so each side need to
> initialize the logging system. On the server side it is done by the
> redirectors, which are the first classes to be called. On the client side,
> I've tried to do the same and initialized the logging system in
> AbstractTestCase.runBare() which is the first method called by JUnit.
>
> What is strange is that this works fine for all versions of JUnit I have
> been using but maybe you are using an old one. I've tried it with JUnit
> 3.6,
> 3.7. Also, Cactus is run every day with the latest junit version from CVS.
>
> As you mentionned, it seems indeed to be an issue with the way junit loads
> the classes in memory and for you the AbstractHttpClient class is loaded
> before AbstractTestCase.
>
> What version of JUnit are you using ?
> Thanks
> -Vincent
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 2:49 AM
> Subject: RE: VAJ 3.5.3 Class loader problem
>
>
> >
> > I just added a static initialiser for the logger in the
> AbstractHttpClient
> > class and it works fine. That is, before the call to getLog(), the
> > following line:
> >
> > static { LogService.getInstance().init("/log_client.properties"); }
> >
> > I don't currently want to use Log4J so there will only be a dummy
> > implementation that does nothing (place holder). But adding Log4J to
> class
> > path works fine as well.
> >
> > So, If I understand the Cactus framework ... the only other times an
> > initialiser is called is in the ServletTestRedirector and
> JspTestRedirector
> > classes, which are both on the server side. But I assume that
> > AbstractHttpClient is on the client side (given away by the name), so
> the
> > Redirector initialisers don't have effect for the AbstractHttpClient
> > class??
> >
> > Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong in adding the above line or
> if
> > there is a flaw in my thinking.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Aklil
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Aklil
> > Girma/Internal/Accenture@Accentu To:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > re cc:
> > Subject: RE: VAJ
> 3.5.3 Class loader problem
> > 18/10/2001 10:58 AM
> > Please respond to cactus-user
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I have figured out how to get around this problem .... I thought I
> > understood why this makes my problem go away ... .but I don't think I
> fully
> > do.
> >
> > This problem was annoying me so I stepped through the code and found
that
> > commenting out the following lines makes my problem go away and I can
run
> a
> > very simple test ..,
> >
> > From AbstractHttpClient's constructor I commented out the logger line:
> >
> > private static Log logger = LogService.getInstance
> > ().getLog(AbstractHttpClient.class.getName())
> >
> > which then meant the logger entries in the doTest(ServletTestRequest)
> > method of the AbstractHttpClient class had to be commented out also
> >
> > logger.entry("doTest(" + theRequest + ")"); AND
> logger.exit("doTest");
> >
> > Ok I don't understand exactly why this makes it work, but here is what I
> > have discovered in my investigation ... please feel free to shed some
> > light:
> >
> > 1. The declaration of logger, requires a call to LogService.init()
before
> > you can call the getLog() method.
> > 2. Addidng Log4J to the class path does not help in anyway.
> > 3. If you are wondering why AbstractHttpClient's constructor gets
called,
> > the short story is:
> >
> > TestSuite's Class argument constructor that is called from the suite()
> > method of the your custom test class, traverses the inheritance
hierarchy
> > to find all the "declared methods", basically trying to get all the ones
> > that start with "test". (This is how JUnit works)
> >
> > So in my case... the hierarchy is:
> >
> > ShoppingCartServletTest (my own test class)
> > ---> ServletTestCase (cactus parent)
> > --------> AbstractTestCase (cactus parent)
> >
> > runGeneric(AbstractHttpClient) is a "declared method" in
> AbstractTestCase.
> >
> > I've probably confused rather than helped the issue. I hope at least one
> > person understands what I'm talking about and can shed more light on the
> > issue.
> >
> > The bottom line is, commenting out those 3 lines has solved my problem,
> but
> > I don't quite understand why because there are other logger entries in
> > other classes (e.g. AutoReadHttpURLConnection and HttpClientHelper) with
> > the same logger declaration and they don't create a problem.
> >
> > I hope this helps.
> >
> > Regards
> > Aklil
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Nick Chalko
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:
> > "'[EMAIL PROTECTED]'"
> >
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 18/10/2001 06:39 AM cc:
> > Please respond to Subject: RE: VAJ 3.5.3
Class
> > loader problem
> > cactus-user
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I check "all projects" for the class path of the client, and I still get
> > the
> >
> > Failed to invoke suite():java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError
> >
> > So I still stuck running cactus from the command line against Weblogic,
> > instead inside VAJ.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Idler, Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 8:46 AM
> > To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> > Subject: RE: VAJ 3.5.3 Class loader problem
> >
> >
> > Hi David and Aklil,
> >
> > I was having a similar problem and finally remembered what I did to
> correct
> > it. I don't currently have VisualAge installed and I'm going from
memory
> > on
> > this one. You might also look in the archived postings because I
believe
> > that there was another thread on this topic.
> >
> > The problem may be that the Servlet API project can't be found by the
> > client-side of the cactus test. The Servlet project is automatically
> > included in the classpath for WTE, but you need to explicitly add it to
> the
> > classpath of the project that contains the test class. You can either
> add
> > the Servlet project globally for use in all projects or you can add it
> > specifically to the classpath for the project that you are testing. As
> an
> > explanation for those who don't use VisualAge, you can add VisualAge
> > projects to the classpath in addition to directories.
> >
> > I think that the offending class was ServletException. One of my test
> > methods was declared as throwing this exception. Since the exception
> class
> > couldn't be found, the suite wasn't successfully created. Even though
> > testXxxx() is executed on the server side, the exceptions it throws must
> be
> > locatable on the client side.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> > privileged or confidential information. If you have received it in
> error,
> > please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other
> > use of the email by you is prohibited.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> > privileged or confidential information. If you have received it in
> error,
> > please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other
> > use of the email by you is prohibited.
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> privileged or confidential information. If you have received it in error,
> please notify the sender immediately and delete the original. Any other
> use of the email by you is prohibited.
