On Mon, 11 Jul 2022 15:36:47 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons <[email protected]> wrote:
>> test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/InheritDocForUserTags/DocTest.java line 57:
>>
>>> 55: // javadoc does not report an exit code for an internal
>>> exception (!)
>>> 56: // so monitor stderr for stack dumps.
>>> 57: checkOutput(Output.STDERR, false, "at com.sun");
>>
>> This is a general comment for a followup discussion and future work.
>>
>> Should we have a standard default-on check in `JavadocTester` for "no stack
>> traces"? That is, the equivalent of this line here. We could model such a
>> check on `checkLinks` or `checkAccessibility` such that a hypothetical
>> `checkNoCrashes` could be disabled in the (rare?) cases that they might be
>> expected. (For example, checking the tool/doclet behavior when a crash does
>> occur.)
>
> This is a general comment for a followup discussion and future work.
>
> While the bug and this test are about "no crashes", we should ensure that we
> have positive tests elsewhere for the actual output generated, assuming that
> no crash occurred.
We have such a check already, but it's used specifically for snippets. If you
want, we could "hoist" that check from SnippetTester into JavadocTester.
However, I would prefer doing that in a separate PR.
public class SnippetTester extends JavadocTester {
...
/*
* When checking for errors, it is important not to confuse one error with
* another. This method checks that there are no crashes (which are also
* errors) by checking for stack traces. We never expect crashes.
*/
protected void checkNoCrashes() {
checking("check crashes");
Matcher matcher = Pattern.compile("\\s*at.*\(.*\.java:\\d+\)")
.matcher(getOutput(Output.STDERR));
if (!matcher.find()) {
passed("");
} else {
failed("Looks like a stacktrace: " + matcher.group());
}
}
...
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk19/pull/54
