Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [junit] TestCase inheritance...

Expand Messages
  • Allan Halme
    Re neatness: I find a certain simplicity in the codebase being split into two classes of classes (to overload a word): Foo and FooTest. Given Foo, you ll
    Message 1 of 12 , Sep 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Re neatness: I find a certain simplicity in the codebase being split
      into two classes of classes (to overload a word): Foo and FooTest.
      Given Foo, you'll always know that its tests are in FooTest, and given
      FooTest, you know its testing Foo.

      However, just today I realised that it's also neat--different
      neat--not to have a bloated FooTest when clearly I can split my test
      cases in to FooATest and FooBTest for much better clarity and
      separation of different test fixtures.

      I have also slowly come to cease care about it at all, too.

      t.allan


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: J. B. Rainsberger <jbrains@...>
      Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:44:57 -0400
      Subject: Re: [junit] TestCase inheritance...
      To: junit@yahoogroups.com

      Allan Halme wrote:

      > I realise you weren't trying to solve that problem, but the question
      > still came to mind :)

      Understood. :)

      > And, indeed, the one-test-suite-per-production-class is not a rule,
      > but it's pretty neat; but no so neat that we won't depart from it when
      > necessary.

      I don't think it's so neat, really. I don't care about it at all.
      --
      J. B. Rainsberger,
      Diaspar Software Services
      http://www.diasparsoftware.com :: +1 416 791-8603
      Let's write software that people understand





      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

      ADVERTISEMENT


      ________________________________
      Yahoo! Groups Links

      To visit your group on the web, go to:
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/

      To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      junit-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
    • j b gandhi
      sorry to interrupt the thread. to introduce myself, i am working as a QA engineer in a programming firm. i am new to JUnit. the MONEY example given on the
      Message 2 of 12 , Sep 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        sorry to interrupt the thread.

        to introduce myself, i am working as a QA engineer in a programming firm.

        i am new to JUnit.
        the MONEY example given on the website does not help me understand how
        exatly to implement it in real time programs.

        can somebody please give me a more roboust example.



        thanks


        jignesh

        -----Original Message-----
        From: Allan Halme [mailto:allan.halme@...]
        Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 3:27 PM
        To: junit@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [junit] TestCase inheritance...


        Re neatness: I find a certain simplicity in the codebase being split
        into two classes of classes (to overload a word): Foo and FooTest.
        Given Foo, you'll always know that its tests are in FooTest, and given
        FooTest, you know its testing Foo.

        However, just today I realised that it's also neat--different
        neat--not to have a bloated FooTest when clearly I can split my test
        cases in to FooATest and FooBTest for much better clarity and
        separation of different test fixtures.

        I have also slowly come to cease care about it at all, too.

        t.allan


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: J. B. Rainsberger <jbrains@...>
        Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 11:44:57 -0400
        Subject: Re: [junit] TestCase inheritance...
        To: junit@yahoogroups.com

        Allan Halme wrote:

        > I realise you weren't trying to solve that problem, but the question
        > still came to mind :)

        Understood. :)

        > And, indeed, the one-test-suite-per-production-class is not a rule,
        > but it's pretty neat; but no so neat that we won't depart from it when
        > necessary.

        I don't think it's so neat, really. I don't care about it at all.
        --
        J. B. Rainsberger,
        Diaspar Software Services
        http://www.diasparsoftware.com :: +1 416 791-8603
        Let's write software that people understand





        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

        ADVERTISEMENT


        ________________________________
        Yahoo! Groups Links

        To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        junit-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

        ADVERTISEMENT

        <http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129c8r3j2/M=298184.5285298.6392945.3001176/D=gr
        oups/S=1705006905:HM/EXP=1094164009/A=2319498/R=0/SIG=11thfntfp/*http://www.
        netflix.com/Default?mqso=60185352&partid=5285298> click here

        <http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=298184.5285298.6392945.3001176/D=groups/S=
        :HM/A=2319498/rand=284489000>


        _____

        Yahoo! Groups Links


        * To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/


        * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        junit-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        <mailto:junit-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>


        * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
        <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.