> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Lightbody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 01 August 2002 11:11
> To: Cactus Users List
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Rename clientSetUp() and clientTearDown() in
1.5dev
>
> Personally I think clientSetUp and clientTearDown make more sense,
> assuming
> they work just like setUp and tearDown (once per test).
... yes, but Cactus has already extended JUnit by having beginXXX() and
endXXX() methods that are executed on the client side. In other words,
Cactus is "Junit-compliant" on the server side but the client side is
purely Cactus-specific.
As we already have beginXXX() and endXXX(), don't you think it looks
logical to have begin() and end() being global extensions (before and
after each test) ?
Thanks
-Vincent
>
> -Pat
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Vincent Massol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: "'Cactus Users List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 10:56 AM
> Subject: [VOTE] Rename clientSetUp() and clientTearDown() in 1.5dev
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Charles Massey has proposed on the 15th of July another name for the
> > clientSetUp() and clientTearDown() methods : begin() and end().
> >
> > I think it is a better name than what we have and I propose to make
the
> > change to begin() and end(). It is more logical as we already have
> > beginXXX() and endXXX() methods.
> >
> > What do you think ?
> >
> > Here is my +1
> >
> > Thanks
> > -Vincent
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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]>
