I would use "AsyncGetCallTrace" for the top level directory name.
That would make it easier for someone searching the test space...
Dan
On 5/2/19 7:03 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
Hi Serguei,
Thanks for the review, I fixed the bug name but have not yet changed
the webrev. Does anyone else have an opinion of the naming of the tests?
Thanks all!
Jc
On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 5:10 PM <serguei.spit...@oracle.com
<mailto:serguei.spit...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Hi Jc,
I'd suggest to change the bug title to be:
Add a AsyncGetCallTrace test
I'm not sure about the test names.
Maybe, it is Okay to keep the AGCT abbreviation.
But I'd like to hear other opinions.
Thanks,
Serguei
On 4/30/19 3:47 PM, Jean Christophe Beyler wrote:
Hi all,
As I start looking at working on the AGCT bugs, I wanted to at
least start creating a baseline of tests for AGCT. This is an
attempt to just have a "base" test (and infrastructure) that
tries to call AGCT and get back some sane information.
Next step will be to add a few more tests that will be exposing
the limitations of
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8178287 for example.
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jcbeyler/8223040/webrev.00/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Ejcbeyler/8223040/webrev.00/>
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8223040
This passed the test on my linux machine (the test is only for
linux due to the dlsym) and the submit-repo.
Thanks,
Jc
--
Thanks,
Jc
