On 23 April 2018 at 00:48, Stephane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote:
> No idea. May be people were thinking that printOn: were not worth tests. > Now I would like to revisit some unused features of Sunit such as the > history. > > On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 3:44 AM, Ben Coman <[email protected]> wrote: > > I bumped into ClassTestCase for the first time, with class comment... > > "This class is intended for unit tests of individual classes and their > > metaclasses. > > It provides methods to determine the coverage of the unit tests. > > > > Subclasses are expected to re-implement: > > #classesToBeTested and > > #selectorsToBeIgnored > btw, I see in Pharo6.1 that most implementors of #selectorsToBeIgnored are circa 2003 authored by "brb". Note it was useful to be able to see this info in "Versions" which is currently not available in Pharo 7. cheers -ben > > They should also implement to confirm that all methods have been tested. > > #testCoverage > > super testCoverage. > > " > > > > A few questions to improve my knowledge of how to use this... > > > > a. there are no implementors of #classesToBeTested but several of > > #classToBeTested. I presume the class comment is wrong? > > > > b. there are no implementors of #testCoverage, so I presume I can > ignore > > that? (and I've no example to work from) > > > > c. ClassTestCase is subclassed 73 times, but #selectorsToBeIgnored is > only > > implemented 9 times. So this seems not critical? But btw, every of > those at > > least ignores #printOn:. I'm curious why? These are tagged "private", > but > > is that a good reason not to test it? > > > > My purpose was to add a new class MagnitudeTest for a new > > new method to Magnitude in response to the recent #min:max: discussion. > > > > cheers -ben > >
