I'd prefer something more elegant. How about I use...
Class.forName(java.awt.BufferedImage)
and catch exceptions in the test and handle it gracefully? That way we don't
have to hack apart the script for headless servers.
- Drew
Quoting "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> No, I have no problem with it. It would be nice if you put some kind of
> easy to auto delete filename for it. Something like testBlaBlaAWT so
> that those who for some reason choose to build on a headless server can
> find . -name "*AWT.java" -exec rm '{}' ';' -- but this isn't something
> that would affect me as I'd have no reason to run the unit tests on my
> server. I guess its possible we may one day move the nightly builds to
> a commodity server, so best do something that can be easily removed via
> a script if you don't mind.
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Andy
>
> On Sat, 2002-04-27 at 22:10, Drew Varner wrote:
> > Does anyone have a problem with me importing java.awt.BufferedImage
> for the
> > purposes of a JUnit test?
> >
> > I'd like to examine the image (check width, height, etc.) via the
> Image methods
> > as a sanity check when extracting the byte array. It seems like a good
> way
> > tomake sure the byte array isn't garbage. I don't think JAI or other
> standard
> > Java Image toolkits support WMF files. I'll investigate more.
> >
> > Drew
> > ___________________
> > Drew Varner
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --
> http://www.superlinksoftware.com
> http://jakarta.apache.org/poi - port of Excel/Word/OLE 2 Compound
> Document
> format to java
> http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/bugParade/bugs/4487555.html
> - fix java generics!
> The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to
> vote.
> -Ambassador Kosh
>
>
___________________
Drew Varner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
