On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Matthew Toseland <[email protected]> wrote: > 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? >
The old test depends on the fact that the "head" and "tail" are not valid object. Since this patch remove the head/tail altogether, the old test no longer pass. _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
