Julius Stroffek wrote:
Hi All,
I deal with a problem of testing a functionality of private classes.
<snip>
Bryan pointed me at the discussion at
http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A-JUnit-unit-tests---parallel-test-three--p5711307.html
where Kristian discussed this couple months ago. I talked to Kristian
and he told me that the problem was not solved at that time.
I have only two solutions to this:
1.) Change the visibility of required classes to public.
2.) Maintain the parallel package tree (suggested by Krisitian) with
implementation of tests of private classes.
<snip>
Just wondering, does anyone know if using reflection to bypass the Java access
protection (as Kristian mentioned in the above mentioned thread) is completely
out of the question?
I'm asking because it is mentioned in the JUnit FAQ, and discussed in [1],
although the article does not cover private classes, only fields and
methods/constructors.
--
John
[1] "Subverting Java Access Protection for Unit Testing" -
http://www.onjava.com/pub/a/onjava/2003/11/12/reflection.html
