Thanks for the review Paul. Fix pushed
cheers
/Joel
On 2014-05-16, Paul Sandoz wrote:
>
> On May 16, 2014, at 10:53 AM, Joel Borggren-Franck <joel.fra...@oracle.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On 2014-05-15, Paul Sandoz wrote:
> >>
> >> The non test code looks good to me:
> >>
> >> Not totally sure about the test approach:
> >>
> >> 48 @Test(dataProvider = "data")
> >> 49 public void testClass(Class<?> c, String method) throws Exception {
> >> 50 if (c.getTypeParameters().length == 0)
> >> 51 return;
> >>
> >> 60 @Test(dataProvider = "data")
> >> 61 public void testMethod(Class<?>c, String method) throws Exception {
> >> 62 if ("".equals(method))
> >> 63 return;
> >>
> >> That's gonna produce redundant results in test reports for stuff that is
> >> filtered out by the test method.
> >>
> >> Perhaps split the data provider into two, one for classes and one for
> >> methods, and replace the if statements with asserts?
> >>
> >
> > You are right, thanks for the suggestion. New webrev:
> >
> > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jfranck/8038994/webrev.01/
> >
>
> +1
>
> Paul.
>
