[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12555?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16553634#comment-16553634
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on SOLR-12555:
--------------------------------------------------------
Commit 6ed9607f74398d054e1cda7d1c02da80c2d93180 in lucene-solr's branch
refs/heads/master from [~gerlowskija]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=lucene-solr.git;h=6ed9607 ]
SOLR-12555: Add add'l expectThrows() test helper
> Replace try-fail-catch test patterns
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-12555
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-12555
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Test
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Components: Tests
> Affects Versions: master (8.0)
> Reporter: Jason Gerlowski
> Assignee: Jason Gerlowski
> Priority: Trivial
> Attachments: SOLR-12555-sorted-by-package.txt, SOLR-12555.txt
>
> Time Spent: 10m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> I recently added some test code through SOLR-12427 which used the following
> test anti-pattern:
> {code}
> try {
> actionExpectedToThrowException();
> fail("I expected this to throw an exception, but it didn't");
> catch (Exception e) {
> assertOnThrownException(e);
> }
> {code}
> Hoss (rightfully) objected that this should instead be written using the
> formulation below, which is clearer and more concise.
> {code}
> SolrException e = expectThrows(() -> {...});
> {code}
> We should remove many of these older formulations where it makes sense. Many
> of them were written before {{expectThrows}} was introduced, and having the
> old style assertions around makes it easier for them to continue creeping in.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
