Why not an assert with a meaningful message to test if the property is set?
Jan > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Gintautas Grigelionis [mailto:g.grigelio...@gmail.com] > Gesendet: Freitag, 20. April 2018 10:42 > An: Ant Developers List > Betreff: Re: Ant JUnit tests > > Assumption is a "friendly reminder" -- the test is does not run unless > the assumption is valid; the assumption provides an explanation of what > is missing. My question was about how friendly we should be. > > Gintas > > 2018-04-20 7:14 GMT+02:00 Jaikiran Pai <jai.forums2...@gmail.com>: > > > Like discussed in the other thread, I don't understand what's wrong > > with setting the expected properties in the IDE itself (like the > "ant.home"). > > IDEs provide these configurations/settings for reasons like these. > > What would it achieve by virtually disabling these tests, in IDE, by > > adding those assumptions? > > > > -Jaikiran > > > > > > > > On 20/04/18 10:39 AM, Gintautas Grigelionis wrote: > > > >> I am refactoring Ant JUnit tests with a goal to make them more > >> "IDE-friendly". I found several tests that are implictly dependent > on > >> ant.home property being set. In these cases, the test should be > >> prevented from execution by adding an assumption; however, perhaps > >> there might be a suitable default, like basedir + "/bootstrap" or > >> some other location that might be suggested in, say, javadoc? > >> > >> Thanks, Gintas > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional > > commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ant.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ant.apache.org
