Re: [classlib] Unit and performance testing

[Geir Magnusson Jr]

Mikhail Loenko wrote:
On 1/24/06, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Hello

We have figured out that one of approcahes that was earlier dicussed and that
I originally opposed would work for us.

That is: get PerformanceTest class out of there and replace log() with calls
to java.util.logging.Logger.

Please let me know what you think.
What are you logging?

Normally any information that would be useful to easily detect
the reason of failure. A good test explains why it failed, the best test
submits a bug report and provides a patch, the worst test
just complains that it failed.

Right - so in the event of failure, write all the information that you 
need out.

In the event of success, don't.


I would not wish to debug just to figure out that the reason of failures is
that I've forgot to include something to classpath or there is another
config problem

Right - you look at the test output, which has the ClassNotFound 
stacktrace. That's how I remember to put junit and bcprov in my classpath.



Nobody is going to search log files looking for success/failure messages.

Agreed

If the test passes, then all is fine; if it does not pass then it should
inform the framework (i.e. a failing assertion or an explicit call to
fail()).  At that point JUnit will give you a cause of failure, and if

fail() is not always convinient, for example, how would you print
stack trace to fail()? Meanwhile stacktrace is most often enough
to find what the problems are and sort them out.

if (condition isn't met) {
  System.out.printStackTrace()
  fail()
}


Thanks,
Mikhail

that is not enough you debug it with a debugger not println's.

Regards,
Tim

--

Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java technology centre, UK.