Hi Niclas,
I guess the situation with the Serial protocols is identical to the ones for
the IP-Based drivers. But I think also supporting serial protocols would be a
valuable addition to PLC4X as still a lot of devices out in the wild only
support this form of communication.
In the IP space we
Hi,
I was thinking about converting some of my protocol implementations to
plc4x, but I have only worked in the serialport space, (e.g Modbus/RTU
rather than Modbus/TCP).
There is a ancient Java specification (Java Comms API), which is not only
literally from last millennium, but rather poor as we
Hi,
> Even if I like the way AssertJ handles exceptions a bit more than the
> Hamcrest way, I never was particularly fond of never-ending fluent
> expressions. So I would opt for the Hamcrest version.
No strong view either way as any tests are good to have :-) But I have used
Hamcrest in the p
Hi all,
I think as the discussion moved from the unit-test framework to the framework
we create the assertions with, this deserves a dedicated discussion.
I think the options on the table are currently: JUnits on-board Assertions,
AssertJ or Hamcrest.
I too am not very fond of the ordinary Jun
Hi Niclas,
thanks for that ... this way I deffiitely can get a better feeling for the
hamcrest style.
I think we should simply take this to another discussion thread and hear the
others oppinions.
I know hamcrest for quite some time as the original author of the flexmojos
plugin liked hamcrest
