Hi all, I'm starting to regret ever implementing the Groovy support. It's been nothing but trouble. Test cases which keep failing due to changes in Groovy.
I am currently on holiday and will look into this next year. I wish you all Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year! --knut On 12/18/05, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OK, I've back-fixed the HIVEMIND-161 and HIVEMIND-162 fixes to the 1.1 branch. > > Both the 1.1 branch and the trunk have a failure, presumably related to > Groovy: > > junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: expected:<2> but was:<1> > at junit.framework.Assert.fail(Assert.java:47) > at junit.framework.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:282) > at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:64) > at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:201) > at junit.framework.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:207) > at > org.apache.hivemind.lib.groovy.TestGroovyModuleDescriptorProvider.testMultipleResources(TestGroovyModuleDescriptorProvider.java:57) > at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method) > at > sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:39) > at > sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:25) > at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:585) > at junit.framework.TestCase.runTest(TestCase.java:154) > at junit.framework.TestCase.runBare(TestCase.java:127) > at junit.framework.TestResult$1.protect(TestResult.java:106) > at junit.framework.TestResult.runProtected(TestResult.java:124) > at junit.framework.TestResult.run(TestResult.java:109) > at junit.framework.TestCase.run(TestCase.java:118) > at junit.framework.TestSuite.runTest(TestSuite.java:208) > at junit.framework.TestSuite.run(TestSuite.java:203) > at > org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.runTests(RemoteTestRunner.java:478) > at > org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.run(RemoteTestRunner.java:344) > at > org.eclipse.jdt.internal.junit.runner.RemoteTestRunner.main(RemoteTestRunner.java:196) > > > > > On 12/17/05, Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > These fixes ended up being pretty interlated. > > > > It's all about synchronization and thread locals. > > > > The new code looks much better and, I believe, removes the bottlenecks. > > > > The challenge will be to back-port it to the 1.1 branch since the > > changes are mired inside all the other changes and refactoring related > > to the Maven conversion. > > > > -- > > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant > > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry > > Creator, Jakarta HiveMind > > > > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support > > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com > > > > > -- > Howard M. Lewis Ship > Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant > Creator, Jakarta Tapestry > Creator, Jakarta HiveMind > > Professional Tapestry training, mentoring, support > and project work. http://howardlewisship.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
