A lot of this is to do with the way Ant runs it's tests. I've found using a
test suite speeds things up considerablely. There are some fancy ways of
picking up available tests automatically. Might put it on my todo list.
Regards,
Glen Stampoultzis (TriNexus Pty Ltd)
+63 3 9753-6850 0402 835 458
ICQ: 62722370 EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 12:20 AM
Subject: Re: java.awt.Image in SummaryInformation
> Like I said, heck no (our tests run on forever if you haven't noticed.
> The ones I'm doing for formulas will put you to sleep!) go right ahead.
> However I don't think your approach will work necesarily. At least it
> seemed the error condition I got was not an exception but a message from
> the OS that the link wasn't satisfied. I'm not sure its passed down to
> the program (in which case I'd regard that as a bug), I just didn't
> *see* anything that looked like an exception. I think it caused a java
> exit, but I don't remember for sure. Its fairly easy to add properties
> to the JVM for the purpose of the build. We set one so the unit tests
> could find their data. We could set one based on an environment
> variable for run-x-tests or something. Anyhow, as long as the test is
> named so that its obvious it is dependant on AWT (like by postfixing
> AWT) then it makes no nevermind to me.
>
> -Andy
>
> Drew Varner wrote:
>
> >I am talking about implementing dynamic class loading for unit testing. I
am
> >assuming nobody minds the performance hit for unit tests? This would
allow the
> >tests to run on a machine with X. It would gracefully leave the test on a
> >headless machine. On a machine where X wasn't present, the test would
catch the
> >appropriate exception. I think there'd be one thrown.
> >
> >try
> >{
> > //used quotes this time
> > Class klass = Class.forName("java.awt.BufferedImage");
> >}
> >catch (Exception e) //I'd catch the right exception in real code
> >{
> > //the class is not available because we are
> > // on a headless machine
> > elegantExitFromTest();
> >}
> >
> >This way we wouldn't have to rely on shell script to test the code on a
> >headless box. Best of both worlds thing.
> >
> >Is a performance hit during unit testing a big deal? I'd consider it
outside of
> >the performance critical portion of the program.
> >
> >- Drew
> >
> >Quoting "Andrew C. Oliver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >>Right, but umm, when that runs, X still loads right? or maybe you're
> >>planning a property to turn it off? You'll need the quotes of course.
> >>
> >>-Andy
> >>
> >>Drew Varner wrote:
> >>
> >>>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]
> >
>
>
>
