[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11575?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16265550#comment-16265550
 ] 

Jason Gerlowski edited comment on SOLR-11575 at 11/24/17 11:04 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------

The attached patch changes many of the tests in 
UsingSolrJRefGuideExamplesTest.java to use the print-based-assertion approach 
that Hoss suggested back on SOLR-11032.


I switched the assertions over to being fake-print-driven if:

* the assertion was "doc-included" into the ref-guide, OR 
* doing so improved the assertion itself (some assertions previously just 
checked for String non-emptiness, but now check for specific values)

I put the print-assertion utility functions in the test class itself, which 
isn't the most re-usable.  We can put it somewhere more re-usable, but to make 
the best decision there it might be smart to figure out where else we might 
have these "doc-included" Java snippets.  I created SOLR-11574 to see what 
other ref-guide snippets might be unit-testable earlier, which seems like a 
good place to do that, if we don't want it blocking this JIRA.  I'm also fine 
holding up this JIRA until we answer the reuse question. 

FYI [~hossman], as you requested this on 11032


was (Author: gerlowskija):
The attached patch changes many of the tests in 
UsingSolrJRefGuideExamplesTest.java to use the print-based-assertion approach 
that Hoss suggested back on SOLR-11032.


I switched the assertions over to being fake-print-driven if:

* the assertion was "doc-included" into the ref-guide, OR 
* doing so improved the assertion itself (some assertions previously just 
checked for String non-emptiness, but now check for specific values)

I put the print-assertion utility functions in the test class itself, which 
isn't the most re-usable.  We can put it somewhere more re-usable, but to make 
the best decision there it might be smart to figure out where else we might 
have these "doc-included" Java snippets.  I created SOLR-11574 to see what 
other ref-guide snippets might be unit-testable earlier, which seems like a 
good place to do that, if we don't want it blocking this JIRA.  I'm also fine 
holding up this JIRA until we answer the reuse question. 

FYI [~hossman]

> Cleanup Java Snippets in "Using SolrJ" ref-guide page
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-11575
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11575
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>    Affects Versions: master (8.0)
>            Reporter: Jason Gerlowski
>            Priority: Trivial
>         Attachments: SOLR-11575.patch
>
>
> Hoss pointed out on SOLR-11032 that some of the Java snippets don't do a 
> great job of looking like
> bq. "real code" a user might do something with in an app.
> Particularly, the snippets show how to obtain certain SolrJ objects, but they 
> don't show readers what they can/should do with those objects.  The snippets 
> might be more useful to readers if they printed information returned in the 
> SolrJ object as a result of each API call.  Hoss specifically suggested 
> setting up a print-asserter, which would appear to be a normal 
> print-statement in the ref-guide snippet, but double as an assertion in the 
> JUnit test where the snippet lives.
> This JIRA involves giving that a shot.  It might make sense to figure this 
> out before pulling more Java snippets into the build (as suggested in 
> SOLR-11574).  On the flip side, extracting more snippets into the build might 
> inform a better, consistent format/pattern for the snippets.  So these 
> stories are related, but maybe not strict dependencies of one another.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org

Reply via email to