Rules are good if you use them without fanaticism :) So I think that it is good to include tested method signature in test name. But it is OK to make them shorter in complicated cases.
I do not see any problem with not adding full package name to the class name when it is obvious what class are you talking about. 2006/4/11, LvJimmy，Jing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hi all: > > Following our testcase naming convention, I've find a name as: (hope it > won't break your screen :)) > public void > test_requestPasswordAuthentication_java_lang_String_java_net_InetAddress_int_java_lang_String_java_lang_String_java_lang_String_java_net_URL_java_net_Authenticator_RequestorType() > which is the testcase for > java.net.Authenticator.requestPasswordAuthentication( > String rHost, InetAddress rAddr, int rPort, String rProtocol, > String rPrompt, String rScheme, URL rURL, > Authenticator.RequestorType reqType); > and the class has another two method named requestPasswordAuthentication, > and only this method take URL and RequestorType as its parameters. > The name is somehow too long to see and read, and I guess we can find a > shorter one for it, > e.g.test_requestPasswordAuthentication_URL_RequestorType. As URL and > RequestorType can identify the exactly > method to test. Or a adjusted naming convention shall be take. Any opinions? > > -- > > Best Regards! > > Jimmy, Jing Lv > China Software Development Lab, IBM > > -- Alexey A. Petrenko Intel Middleware Products Division
