My two cents:
(1) It's not necessary to delete a testing project so long as you can guarantee project name uniqueness. However, personally, I prefer everyone clean his own mess after the test, so that the system state is the same both before and after the test.
(2) Reducer is like servlet. Do you normally write constructor for a servlet? (By the way, every class have a constructor, even if you don't write one.)
Cheers,
Cedric
Burt Leung wrote:
Hello Everyone,
From the code review I found one item that people might want to affirm/confirm/comment on.
Review comment: "The javadoc for the createTestProjectClientSide method you're using does not explicity say this, but i think that you do not _have_ to delete client side test projects."
Relevant code: protected void tearDown() throws Exception { ProjectManager.getInstance().deleteProject( this.testProjectGhostName); }
My comment: I copied this implementation structure from another reducer test case that I did not author. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Review comment: "There is no constructor for this reduction function. That 'smells bad' to me. Non-trivial OO classes normally require a constructor (or two)." Relevant code: the IssueReducer My comment: as far as I know, none of the reducers have a constructor. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Please let me know, thanks. Burt
