I have added a contract testing branch and have added the contract tests for all graphs in the core code. I also have contract tests for several other interfaces defined but no suites to exercise them. I recall a recent conversation where tile names were given TS_ prefix for "test suite". I am thinking of giving the contract test suite classes a CT_ prefix (Contract Test).
Thoughts? Oh. As an outline: Contract tests are annotated with @Contract and define the contracts for a specific interface listed in the @Contract annotation. e.g. @Contract(Graph.class) indicates contract test for the Graph interface. I normally name these with the word "Contract" in the class name. e.g. GraphContractTest.java Contract test suites are annotated with @ContractImpl and @RunWith(ContractSuite.class). The @ContractImpl annotation identifies the class under test. e.g. @ContractImpl(CollectionGraph) indicates that CollectionGraph is the implementation under test. These are the ones I am thinking of naming with a CT_ prefix (CT_CollectionGraphTest). These tests generally have one method (a method to provide a "producer" of the class under test. Now that I think about it I think the "CT" should go at the end as CollectionGraph_CT that way all the CollectionGraph tests would be together and easy to find in a directory listing. Claude -- I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web <http://like-like.xenei.com> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren
