On 08/12/2009, Ronan Klyne <[email protected]> wrote: > sebb wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thread Group - Ramp Up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of those are of this form: > > > > > > > > > > ${__javaScript(2*${ramp_up_secs_per_thread})} > > > > > > > > > > Is it allowed to nest the '${}' construct in this way? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > The error message suggests you may have used: > > > > > > > > ${__javaScript(2*${ramp_up_secs_per_thread}} > > > > or > > > > ${__javaScript(2*${ramp_up_secs_per_thread}}) > > > > > > > > by mistake, i.e. misplaced ')' > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I've checked all my thread groups, and they all have the correct syntax > :-s > > > ... > > > > > > Since it was the only thing in that broken expression, I tried changing > > > "ramp_up_secs_per_thread" to be some integer constant, and everything > > > works... > > > > > > This variable is currently set in the test plan to be > > > "${__P(ramp_up,__javaScript(${dev_mode}?0:5))}" > > > > > > Does that look OK? > > > > > > > > > > No, because the default for ramp_up is the string > > "__javaScript(${dev_mode}?0:5)" > > > > If you want the default to be a function, you need to use the ${} wrapper, > i.e. > > > > "${__P(ramp_up,${__javaScript(${dev_mode}?0:5)})}" > > > > > I now understand the use of ${} slightly better than I did before. Does > that construct have a name? I couldn't pick the right one to find docs for > it... > > Now that I've corrected that, I get a alert box saying "error compiling the > tree - see log file". This is the corresponding log file entry: > > 2009/12/08 15:28:55 ERROR - > jmeter.engine.StandardJMeterEngine: Error occurred > compiling the tree: > org.mozilla.javascript.EvaluatorException: missing ; before > statement (<cmd>#1)
IIRC, that error is caused by trailing blank(s) in the JS script. > at > org.mozilla.javascript.DefaultErrorReporter.runtimeError(DefaultErrorReporter.java:98) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.DefaultErrorReporter.error(DefaultErrorReporter.java:85) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.addError(Parser.java:126) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.reportError(Parser.java:132) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.statementHelper(Parser.java:1175) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.statement(Parser.java:623) > at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.parse(Parser.java:355) > at org.mozilla.javascript.Parser.parse(Parser.java:293) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.Context.compileImpl(Context.java:2238) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.Context.compileString(Context.java:1284) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.Context.compileString(Context.java:1273) > at > org.mozilla.javascript.Context.evaluateString(Context.java:1129) > at > org.apache.jmeter.functions.JavaScript.execute(JavaScript.java:89) > at > org.apache.jmeter.engine.util.CompoundVariable.execute(CompoundVariable.java:143) > at > org.apache.jmeter.engine.util.CompoundVariable.execute(CompoundVariable.java:112) > at > org.apache.jmeter.functions.Property2.execute(Property2.java:76) > at > org.apache.jmeter.engine.util.CompoundVariable.execute(CompoundVariable.java:143) > at > org.apache.jmeter.engine.util.CompoundVariable.execute(CompoundVariable.java:112) > at > org.apache.jmeter.testelement.property.FunctionProperty.getStringValue(FunctionProperty.java:80) > at > org.apache.jmeter.testelement.AbstractTestElement.getPropertyAsString(AbstractTestElement.java:213) > at > org.apache.jmeter.config.Argument.getValue(Argument.java:111) > at > org.apache.jmeter.config.Arguments.getArgumentsAsMap(Arguments.java:90) > at > org.apache.jmeter.testelement.TestPlan.getUserDefinedVariables(TestPlan.java:140) > at > org.apache.jmeter.engine.PreCompiler.addNode(PreCompiler.java:88) > at > org.apache.jorphan.collections.HashTree.traverse(HashTree.java:966) > at > org.apache.jmeter.engine.StandardJMeterEngine.run(StandardJMeterEngine.java:391) > at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source) > > I can see that it's processing the UDV section of the test plan element, > and that it's fallen through to evaulating the second argument to __P. I > can't tell what's gone wrong inside here though... > Might I prevail upon you again for some more help? > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
