+1 for having the doc. But personally I don't know the way how to run tests from the particular test class (not to speak of individual test methods) using the current build system. So I don't really know what exactly should be copy/pasted. Or you was talking about by-hand test invocation cmd mentioned above?
Thanks, 2006/12/5, Tony Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Agree! When I tried harmony on some applications, I found it is very hard to run the test of application mainly because there is no instruction for that at all. So I think it is also not very easy for user who have interest to run tests of harmony. And a good instruction may be good for having many user's help to run harmony tests on various platforms. On 12/4/06, Oliver Deakin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Perhaps some kind of "How To Run The Classlib Tests" section on > the website would be useful? (Assuming there isn't already one with > this information in) Then none of us would have to remember - it > would be right there to copy/paste :) > > Regards, > Oliver > > > Ivan Popov wrote: > > Alexei, > > > > I agree that it is still possible to run JUnit tests from command line > > even without having main() in the code. But I think it is easier to > > run test by convenient way > > > > $ java -cp junit.jar TestClass > > > > rather than in a more complex manner > > > > $ java -cp junit.jar junit.textui.TestRunner TestClass > > > > Actually, I constantly forget the right spelling of the full class > > name for TestRunner class and have to look into JUnit doc to specify > > proper name for such a command line. Also, it would be inconvenient if > > someone runs test from an IDE that does not support JUnit environment, > > but launches test as a usual Java application. > > > > I don't insist on adding main() to each JUnit testcase, but I see no > > reason for removing this functionality from those test where it > > already exists. > > > > Thanks. > > Ivan > > > > On 11/29/06, Alexei Fedotov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Ivan, Stepan, > >> > >> I personally set +1 for removing main() method. Any script or command > >> line can be trivially modified to launch JUnit tests without main() > >> method: one should just add junit.textui.TestRunner class before a > >> test class name. > >> > >> $ java -cp junit.jar junit.textui.TestRunner TestClass > >> > >> I'm writing this trivial thing here because during our work on class > >> library test enabling it was FAQ N1 for all C/C++ developers. > >> > >> Note, any JUnit test won't work without junit.jar anyway. If you have > >> junit.jar, you have a standard test runner, which is also quite > >> lightweight. > >> > >> -- > >> Thank you, > >> Alexei > >> > >> On 11/29/06, Ivan Popov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > -1 for removing main(). > >> > > >> > I often run individual tests from command line or using scripts and > >> > it's easier to launch them as a usual Java application. Also, this > >> > facilitates creating separate bundle with test to attach to a bug > >> > report or send to other people, who can just run it from command line > >> > or use script with the all required options already specified, instead > >> > of setting IDE for this test. > >> > > >> > Thanks. > >> > Ivan > >> > > >> > On 11/29/06, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > > There is a large amount of inconsistency across the tests and I'd > >> like > >> > > to lobby for cleaning them up as much as possible. I'm of the > >> opinion > >> > > that test code should be clean, simple and transparent. Here are > >> some > >> > > of the more noticeable items that I'd like to cleanup. > >> > > > >> > > * Empty setUp/teardown methods - There are a number of tests that > >> > > override setUp and/or teardown methods, but are either empty or just > >> > > call the super implementation. > >> > > > >> > > * Singleton suite methods - There are some tests that contain a > >> static > >> > > "suite" method that creates a TestSuite and adds one test (the test > >> > > class it's declared in). Are there any practical uses for these > >> > > methods? TestSuites are for grouping together tests to treat them as > >> > > one unit. Since these suites are just one test, it doesn't seem to > >> > > provide much value. > >> > > > >> > > * main method launching text runner - There are some tests that > >> > > contain "main" methods which run the enclosing test via a JUnit text > >> > > runner. Most IDEs have built-in support for JUnit and can launch any > >> > > test arbitrarily and Ant can do the same thing. Does anyone launch > >> > > tests via these methods? > >> > > > >> > > My proposal would be to clean up these inconsistencies by > >> eliminating > >> > > them, but what does everyone else think? > >> > > > >> > > -Nathan > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > -- > Oliver Deakin > IBM United Kingdom Limited > > -- Tony Wu China Software Development Lab, IBM
-- Alexei Zakharov, Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
