On Monday 28 August 2006 11:18 pm, Matt Chotin wrote: > A rewrite is probably in order for FlexUnit. The original goal (of the > folks who wrote the AS2 version) was to make it as close to JUnit as > possible. With the asynchronous nature that may be more difficult.
Yeah, I agree completely and wish I had time to do it or at least help out. Writing the whole thing based on asynchronous events should probably make it pretty clean. > Anyway, what we did in our unit tests when it was possible to receive the > fault was just write the async handler to accept both ResultEvent and > FaultEvent (using their superclass which I think is RPCEvent). Then we'd > just assert that the event was a ResultEvent and if it wasn't the assertion > failed and the test failed and voila. Basically you need to do one > addAsync for every invocation that could lead to an event, not for every > possible return event. Good idea! It hadn't even crossed my mind for some reason or another... it complicates things a bit but will serve as a good workaround. Thanks. --Kaleb -- Flexcoders Mailing List FAQ: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/files/flexcodersFAQ.txt Search Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/flexcoders/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
