Mikhail Loenko wrote:
I've tried to integrate rmi2 tests to rmi module, and found some odd things.

Let's take a look for example at TestActivationGroupDesc.java

it has 5158 test methods, most of which are very similar.
For example it has 855 tests that invoke constructor with various parameters
and check that new did not return null and no exception was thrown:

Can 'new' actually return null?  My read of the JLS says that it won't.



Compare

public void testActivationGroupDescStringStringMarshalledObjectPropertiesCommandEnvironment006()
{

   try{
       Properties p= new Properties();
       assertNotNull(msgNotNull, new ActivationGroupDesc(null ,  null ,
new MarshalledObject(new Double(23.4)) , new Properties() ,
               new ActivationGroupDesc.CommandEnvironment("Hola la",
               new String[0])));
   } catch (Throwable e) {
       fail(msgNoException+e);
   }
}

and

public void testActivationGroupDescStringStringMarshalledObjectPropertiesCommandEnvironment007()
{
   try{
       Properties p= new Properties();
       assertNotNull(msgNotNull, new ActivationGroupDesc(null , null ,
new MarshalledObject(new Double(23.4)) , new Properties() ,
               new ActivationGroupDesc.CommandEnvironment("", null)));
   } catch (Throwable e) {
       fail(msgNoException+e);
   }
}


This is how the constructor under test looks like:
public ActivationGroupDesc(String className, String codebase,
       MarshalledObject data, Properties props,
       ActivationGroupDesc.CommandEnvironment env) {

   this.className = className;
   this.location = codebase;
   this.data = data;
   this.props = props;
   this.env = env;
}

It seems that instead of those million test cases we need just a few
that would verify that getXXX() methods return what was passed into constructor
plus possibly some tests that pass 'suspicious' parameters like null.

Thoughts?

I don't agree that would be enough - having tests that assualt the CTORs w/ combinations of crap to see what happens isn't a bad thing. Not a fun thing to write, but certainly not something I vote on throwing away if someone wrote it already.

Why do you see a problem?

I think that it's misleading to trust only that getters return what's passed in...

geir



---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to