When writing antunit tests, one cannot use the
log-inspection assertions or the new au:logcontent
resource outside the context of an AntUnit test. This
is understandable/unavoidable, but it does mean that
there are some tests that cannot be developed with
'ant -f ...'. Obviously you could write new tests in
separate files, but when they share setup with other
tests, that is inconvenient. I was thinking of adding
a means of [in|ex]cluding tests to be run. To that
end, it seems like it would be easy to use PatternSets
for this; it also seems like this is the kind of weird
idea I have that scares people, so I'm bringing it up
on the list.
So if file test.xml had tests "testFoo", "testBar",
and "testBaz", you could do things like
<property name="antunit.includetests"
value="test?*" />
<property name="antunit.excludetests" value="" />
<antunit includetests="${antunit.includetests}"
excludetests="${antunit.excludetests}">
<resources refid="testfiles-defined-elsewhere" />
</antunit>
nested includes/excludes could be supported something
like
<antunit>
<resources refid="testfiles-defined-elsewhere" />
<testpatterns><!-- here's a nested patternset -->
<include name="testFoo" />
</testpatterns>
</antunit>
Hopefully you get the idea. How crazy is this? I
recognize the semi-evil of how I specified the default
includes "test?*" above, but that was weighed against
the evil of using "target pinball" to choose one of
two separate <antunit> invocations, and since this is
obviously more of an expert feature I really don't
feel too bad about it.
-Matt
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
