Hi Glenn,

Yeah, JUnit4 doesn't allow one to parametrize test names this is a
known issue. I did spend some time looking into how it would be
possible, see https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51928.
Hopefully it will be rectified soon.

Mehdi

On 16 November 2011 23:47, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote:
> With the recent transition to JUnit4 runner and changes to
> LayoutEngineTestCase, it is now someone difficult to determine (from output
> data alone) which layoutengine test file failed when a regression occurs. In
> particular, the exception trace generated from EvalCheck, TrueCheck, etc.
> does not include the test case input file name. So one ends up with
> something like the following in
> the TEST-org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestCase.txt file in
> builds/test-reports:
> Testcase: runTest[342] took 0.017 sec
>         Caused an ERROR
> Expected XPath expression to evaluate to '2', but got '' (XPath:
> //pageViewport[@nr=1]/page/regionViewport/regionBody/mainReference/span/flow/block/lineArea/inlineparent/text)
> java.lang.RuntimeException: Expected XPath expression to evaluate to '2',
> but got '' (XPath:
> //pageViewport[@nr=1]/page/regionViewport/regionBody/mainReference/span/flow/block/lineArea/inlineparent/tex\
> t)
>   at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.EvalCheck.doCheck(EvalCheck.java:86)
> at org.apache.fop.layoutengine.EvalCheck.check(EvalCheck.java:60)
> at
> org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestCase.doATChecks(LayoutEngineTestCase.java:258)
> at
> org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestCase.checkAll(LayoutEngineTestCase.java:191)
> at
> org.apache.fop.layoutengine.LayoutEngineTestCase.runTest(LayoutEngineTestCase.java:172)
> Testcase: runTest[343] took 0.012 sec
> Unfortunately, there is no way to correlate runTest[342] with a specific
> test case input file. It would be very useful (for AT and IF tests) to also
> include the test case input file name/path in this output. Otherwise, one is
> forced to run junit in a debugger with a breakpoint on EvalCheck, TrueCheck,
> etc.
>
>

Reply via email to