Bill, Go ahead if you wish to patch Cactus for your need. At this point I wouldn't want to deviate from the base JUnit. However we could host your extension on the cactus web site, under an extension page if you wish.
Thanks -Vincent > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Laird [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 07 February 2002 17:19 > To: Cactus Users List > Subject: Re: Cactus as functional test tool > > Hey Vincent. Thanks for the pointer. I am totally brand new to Cactus, so > any pointers in the area of where to customize are of great value. Without > looking at the implementation of the Cactus testcase extension, based on > your snippet, it looks as > if perhaps a simple reorganization around the code that does a match on > no-arg test methods would do the trick. > > Thoughts? > > Cheers, > Bill > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Cactus Users List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 2:14 PM > Subject: RE: Cactus as functional test tool > > > > Bill, > > > > I have not had the time yet to completely review the additions to JUnit > > discussed at http://www.gnufoo.org/junit/index.html. However, I don't > > believe they will work with Cactus as is. > > > > Here is the contract between Cactus and JUnit : > > - Cactus test cases extend JUnit TestCase > > - Any JUnit TestRunner should work with Cactus > > > > However it seems that one problem is the call of the testXXX() methods. > > "JUnit featuring dynamic proxies" mentions the ability to call a test > > method that accepts parameters. Currently this call is made by Cactus > > TestCase extension : > > > > protected void runServerTest() throws Throwable > > { > > Method runMethod = null; > > try { > > // use getMethod to get all public inherited > > // methods. getDeclaredMethods returns all > > // methods of this class but excludes the > > // inherited ones. > > runMethod = > > getClass().getMethod(this.getCurrentTestMethod(), > > new Class[0]); > > > > } catch (NoSuchMethodException e) { > > fail("Method [" + this.getCurrentTestMethod() + > > "()] does not exist for class [" + > > this.getClass().getName() + "]."); > > } > > if (runMethod != null && > > !Modifier.isPublic(runMethod.getModifiers())) { > > fail("Method [" + this.getCurrentTestMethod() + > > "()] should be public"); > > } > > > > try { > > runMethod.invoke(this, new Class[0]); > > } > > catch (InvocationTargetException e) { > > e.fillInStackTrace(); > > throw e.getTargetException(); > > } > > catch (IllegalAccessException e) { > > e.fillInStackTrace(); > > throw e; > > } > > } > > > > thus it won't accept parameters. In the same spirit that Shane has > > provided a patch to JUnit, you'll also need to provide a patch to Cactus > > (at least a patch to the above code but probably more). > > > > Hope it helps. > > -Vincent > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Bill Laird [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: 28 January 2002 19:39 > > > To: Cactus Users List > > > Subject: Re: Cactus as functional test tool > > > > > > Sorry for the awful formatting on that last message guys. Let me > > rephrase > > > the question at hand. Will I be able to 'plug and play' versions of > > junit > > > with cactus? Specifically, the one modified for the dynamic proxy > > > interfaces > > > at http://www.gnufoo.org/junit/index.html . > > > > > > Regards, > > > Bill Laird > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Bill Laird" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: "Cactus Users List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 2:32 PM > > > Subject: Cactus as functional test tool > > > > > > > > > > Hello - what are your thoughts on using Cactus as a functional test > > > tool? > > > > I'm thinking about using cactus as a functional test tool. To > > accomplish > > > > this task, I need Junit tests that accept arguements. To accomplish > > > this, > > > I > > > > am thinking of using the Junit featuring dynamic extensions. (see > > > > http://www.gnufoo.org/junit/index.html ) . I'm wondering if the > > dynamic > > > > extension mechanism will work with the cactus architecture. > > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > THanks, > > > > Bill Laird > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:cactus-user- > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:cactus-user- > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:cactus-user- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:cactus-user- > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
