https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jena/Experimental/new-test/src/test/java/com/hp/hpl/jena/testing_framework/manifest

Has a manifest test annotation, a test runner and a test suite.  It looks
like it may use junit-contracts (
https://github.com/Claudenw/junit-contracts/) which may bite off more than
you want to chew.

Give me an example of the file and tests that you want to run and I'll take
a crack at them this evening.

Claude


On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote:

> Has anyone got experience of extending JUnit4?
>
> I want to get rid of the usage of JUnit3-style TestSuite and TestCase.
> (Why? No reason other than an itch that using JUnit3 "junit.*" is old
> stuff.)
>
> These are used in the scripted tests because a TestSuite can have variable
> number of tests and of variable type, a TestSuiet can contain a TestSuite.
>
> The working group tests from DAWG, SPARQL-WG and RDF 1.1 are scripted with
> an RDF manifest file.  A manifest can refer to other manifests.
>
> JUnit4 parameterized tests are not sufficient.  The best I got was to turn
> a single manifest into a parameterized test set, with one test per
> parameterization.  That makes naming messy (I got the class to have the
> right name but each class instance has one test called the same thing (e.g.
> "test").  I could not see how to include @Parameterized inside a
> @Parameterized.
>
> What I have ended up so far is having to implement a JUnit4 Runner,
> actually 3 of them, one to take class to pick out the annotations for the
> manifests and two variants for runner that is either a single scripted test
> and a test manifest runner including sub-manifests as a tree.
>
> I know Junti4 is a testing "framework" but I feel I have had to write a
> lot of machinery for what was in JUnit3 quite simple.  I get the feeling
> I've missed something somewhere.
>
> Any ideas?
>
>         Andy
>



-- 
I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web<http://like-like.xenei.com>
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren

Reply via email to