On 11/28/06, Tim Ellison wrote:
Stepan Mishura wrote: > On 11/27/06, Leo Li wrote: >> >> Hi, all: >> During fixing the bug of Harmony-2249, I found that the testcase in >> one >> junit test file might lead to other fail in a different junit file. After >> digging into it, I am aware that testcase can influence the global state >> of >> a VM, for example, the resolution of class (both RI and Harmony have >> similar >> behavior). Although I changed the testcase as a workaround, it is not >> tested so thoroughly as I expected in order not to lead other tests to >> fail. > > > If a test's execution influence of VM state and this is critical for other > test then the test can fork VM (via Support_Exec.execJava()) and do all > testing in the forked VM. +1 -- and this should be the exception, in general tests should put things back as they found them. exec'ing a new Java is for those cases where you cannot do that.
Yes, exactly! We should use only is a test "taints" testing env. and we can not restore it. Thanks, Stepan. Regards,
Tim -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
