On Friday 20 February 2009 14:28:59 [email protected] wrote:
> Author: j16sdiz
> Date: 2009-02-20 14:28:58 +0000 (Fri, 20 Feb 2009)
> New Revision: 25747
> 
> Modified:
>    trunk/freenet/src/freenet/support/DoublyLinkedListImpl.java
>    trunk/freenet/test/freenet/support/DoublyLinkedListImplTest.java
> Log:
> Clean up DoublyLinkedListImpl internals, prepare for generic (bug 2512)
> 
> Instead of keeping a extra "tail" and "head" objects, point to the
> actual item. This is essential for generic, as we cannot construct
> a generic-ified object for the "tail" and "head".
> 
> This pass the JUnit and some insert/request test.
> 
> Modified: trunk/freenet/test/freenet/support/DoublyLinkedListImplTest.java
> ===================================================================
> --- trunk/freenet/test/freenet/support/DoublyLinkedListImplTest.java  
2009-02-20 09:30:07 UTC (rev 25746)
> +++ trunk/freenet/test/freenet/support/DoublyLinkedListImplTest.java  
2009-02-20 14:28:58 UTC (rev 25747)
> @@ -388,6 +388,7 @@
>                       fail("PromiscuousItemException");
>               } catch (PromiscuousItemException pie) {
>               }
> +
>               try {
>                       // item in other list
>                       list2.insertPrev(l2, array[3]);
> @@ -400,15 +401,20 @@
>                       fail("PromiscuousItemException");
>               } catch (PromiscuousItemException pie) {
>               }
> +
> +             T l3 = new T(9999);
> +             list2.push(l3);
>               try {
>                       // VirginItemException
> -                     list2.insertPrev(l2.getPrev(), new T(8888));
> -                     fail("PromiscuousItemException");
> +                     l3.setPrev(null); // corrupt it
> +                     list2.insertPrev(l3, new T(8888));
> +                     fail("VirginItemException");
>               } catch (VirginItemException vie) {
>               }
>               try {
>                       // VirginItemException
> -                     list2.insertNext(l2.getNext(), new T(8888));
> +                     l2.setNext(null); // corrupt it
> +                     list2.insertNext(l2, new T(8888));
>                       fail("VirginItemException");
>               } catch (VirginItemException vie) {
>               }

AFAICS you have taken out one valid test and put in a new one. Why not keep 
both?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to