Send an announcement when you start large changes. I will do the same. On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 5:31 AM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote:
> OK, I think I am just going to suck it up and make all our tests JUnit > 4 tests. Simpler than adding workarounds just to postpone the time > when that happens. Along the way this should hopefully fix all the > random issues. > > On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > So it looks like the reason some of these tests are failing is due to > > variance from random number generation. > > > > Most tests are old-style JUnit 3 tests and inherit from a base class, > > which among other things resets all random number generators > > everywhere before every test in setUp(). However some tests are JUnit > > 4 tests, and don't (can't) inherit from the same base class (because > > then they're run as JUnit 3 tests and any method not starting with > > "test" isn't run). So they hit this issue again. > > > > The stop-gap solution is to put this in any JUnit 4 test: > > > > @Before > > public void setUp() { > > RandomUtils.useTestSeed(); > > } > > > > Really we should gather this into a new superclass for JUnit 4 tests. > > But then that superclass should have the same functionality as the > > JUnit 3 superclass -- in particular creating and cleaning up temp > > files. Copy-n-paste is ugly but works here. > > > > Any better ideas? > > > > To avoid two parallel superclasses: > > We could merely standardize on JUnit 3, which isn't really backwards, > > just different from JUnit 4. > > Or move everything forward to JUnit 4, which sounds like a load of > > pain (typing @Test 4000 times) but a way forward. > > >
