> On 20 Dec 2016, at 00:56, Peter Levart <peter.lev...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Paul, > > On 12/20/2016 02:51 AM, Paul Sandoz wrote: >> Hi Peter, >> >> Very good work (that’s one heck of a test on steroids). > > Which would not be possible without such nice APIs like Stream with lambdas > and JavaCompiler... ;-) >
:-) >> >> Trivially on Class you could turn the “ Note that there may be …” into >> @apiNote. > > Like this? > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~plevart/jdk9-dev/Class.getMethods.new/webrev.09/ > Yes. >> >> In PublicMethodsTest can you merge Case and Case1? or did you intend the >> separation for future extensions? > > Yes. While I can't currently imagine a situation that is not covered by the > test, I also can't prove that this is an exhaustive test. So if someone > discovers a situation that is important and not covered, it would be easy to > create new Case implementation to cover just this situation and not have to > touch Case1… > Ok. > Maybe, if the need arises, the templating, generation of combinations and > compilation could even be factored out into a test utility and used in some > other test? > Yes. +1 Paul.
