On Fri, 13 Mar 2026 15:23:46 GMT, David Beaumont <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Refactor remaining tests in test/jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/functional to use 
>> junit, along with ancillary utilities and a handful of related tests 
>> elsewhere.
>> 
>> The difficulty in these refactorings is the use of common utilities which 
>> themselves depend on TestNG classes, which are not available when running 
>> JUnit tests. Thus, several bits of functionality in utility classes (esp. 
>> classes in jaxp.library) has had to be re-implemented and inlined. This 
>> isn't terrible, since most of these were one line functions (or complex 
>> functions which could be replaced with one line).
>> 
>> The only exception to this are the handful of tests using 
>> `compareDocumentWithGold` which is too large to justify inlining.
>> 
>> 
>> test/jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/functional/org/xml/sax/ptests/SAXParserNSTableTest.java
>> test/jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/functional/test/auctionportal/UserController.java
>> test/jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/functional/test/gaptest/Bug4693341.java
>> 
>> 
>> These tests can be converted at the end when the utility class itself can be 
>> refactored.
>> 
>> Another complexity is accounting for the differences in test lifecycle 
>> management between TestNG and JUnit. A few classes needed to exploit the 
>> lifecycle and execution modes for single setup and single threaded operation.
>
> David Beaumont has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Manual pass to verify assertEquals() parameter order

test/jaxp/javax/xml/jaxp/functional/org/xml/sax/ptests/ContentHandlerTest.java 
line 115:

> 113:      * Write characters tag along with content of characters when meet
> 114:      * characters event.
> 115:      * @throws IOException error happen when writing file.

These comments were almost always incorrect, so I removed them everywhere 
(given that even if they are correct, they are of very little actual value in a 
test).

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30201#discussion_r2941602971

Reply via email to