Please, just go away. -- Cédric
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Kevin Wright <[email protected]>wrote: > 2010/10/27 Cédric Beust ♔ <[email protected]> > >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Mark Volkmann < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> I wonder though if most people still give their test methods names >>> that begin with "test". I do. One reason is so the test methods stand >>> out in my IDE within the list of methods in the class. I want some way >>> to visually distinguish between test methods and utility methods >>> within the test class. >>> >> >> Yes but this can be easily solved with a tool. Writing an updated Eclipse >> Outline view to group methods by annotations is a matter of a few hours. Hey >> I might even go ahead and write it myself. >> >> The thing is: most of the methods in my tests classes are test methods, so >> the need for this is not that high, at least to me. >> >> As for naming, yes, old habits die hard and it's easy to just start your >> method name with "test", but I find myself being more and more creative with >> this now ("shouldThrowException", "userShouldBePresent", etc...). And I >> always have the handy `description` attribute if I am in a verbose mood >> (@Test(description = "Make sure we have exactly one user named Smith in the >> db"), something that you can't do without annotations. >> > > I'm sorry, but, yes that can be done without annotations: > > http://www.scalatest.org/getting_started_with_fun_suite > http://code.google.com/p/specs/ > > and before anyone starts screaming "Oh no, not Scala again!" > -- Cédric -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.
