gmane.comp.java.junit.user

Re: Externally activated (global) rules

Henning Groß — 2013-05-12T11:58:42

Hi Matthew!
Sounds like a possibility. I will have a look at it. But I still think it
would be good to have the possibility to enable rules globally.
Regards!


2013/4/30 Matthew Farwell <matthew< at >farwell.co.uk>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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

Re: BlockJUnit4ClassRunner and < at >Ignore

2013-05-05T15:14:21

On Sun, 5 May 2013 14:21:19 +0000
<org.junit< at >io7m.com> wrote:


Sorry, false alarm! The fireTestIgnored() method is called correctly
(an exception elsewhere was being swallowed accidentally, and
preventing the call from occurring).

M


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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

BlockJUnit4ClassRunner and < at >Ignore

2013-05-05T14:21:19

Hello.

I'm writing a small program that passes a custom RunNotifier to an
instance of BlockJUnit4ClassRunner and for some reason, it seems that
the fireTestIgnored() method is never called. I'd expect this method to
be called for a test method annotated with < at >Ignore. Is this expected
behaviour?

This is junit 4.10 on JDK7, if that's relevant.

M


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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

Re: JUnit 4.12 issue when using theory + enum type + DataPoint that contains a null

willmcqueen — 2013-05-04T10:41:36

Done:
     https://github.com/junit-team/junit/issues/673
Thanks, David.

Cheers,
Will

--- In junit< at >yahoogroups.com, David Saff <saff< at >...> wrote:



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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

Re: JUnit 4.12 issue when using theory + enum type + DataPoint that contains a null

David Saff — 2013-05-03T17:03:16

Will,

I think this is relevant to recent work on theories by < at >pimterry.  Can you
create a bug on github, and mention < at >pimterry in the description?  Thanks,

   David


On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:59 PM, willmcqueen <willmcqueen< at >yahoo.com> wrote:



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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

Out of Mem when using < at >DataPoints with Iterator type, request lazy fetch

willmcqueen — 2013-05-02T04:23:55

Hi,

I see that in the current master branch of JUnit, the JUnit 4.12 release notes say:


Fantastic. To me this means that we can now have something similar to TestNG's DataProvider that returns an 'Iterator<Object[]>' (http://testng.org/doc/documentation-main.html):


...but just one problem -- the JUnit Iterable < at >DataPoints doesn't seem to get the data lazily... it looks like it slurps everything into memory before passing it to the Theory test. I'd like to request that we please change the implementation of this method so that the data is ingested lazily (one element at a time, or maybe in batches) to avoid OOME. As a quick test, what I'd consider to be a desirable implementation would be one that passes a test that uses this infinite < at >DataPoints:

import com.google.common.collect.Iterables
  < at >DataPoints
  public static Iterable<String> infiniteDataStream() {
      return Iterables.cycle("one", "two");  //continuously alternate between 2 values
  }

[Ref: http://docs.guava-libraries.googlecode.com/git-hi

JUnit 4.12 issue when using theory + enum type + DataPoint that contains a null

willmcqueen — 2013-05-02T00:59:45

Hi,

I have a Theory with a parameter list that includes a String, a boolean, and an enum. The latter 2 should be automatically assigned and should not need any explicit < at >DataPoint declaration (per the release note description below. When I run the test, the enum param is assigned the null value instead of being assigned each value of the enum, and I'm not sure why this is not working for me. I would appreciate any help you can offer, please.

I cloned master from here:

     https://github.com/junit-team/junit

...and looked at the JUnit 4.12 release notes:

     https://github.com/junit-team/junit/wiki/4.12-release-notes

...and scrolled-down to pull request #654 which says:

"Any theory method parameters with boolean or enum types that can't be supplied with values by any other sources will be automatically supplied with default values: true and false, or every value of the given enum. If other explicitly defined values are available (e.g. from a specified ParameterSupplier or some DataPoints method in th

Re: Externally activated (global) rules

Matthew Farwell — 2013-04-30T13:06:52

Hello,

Are you using maven?

If so, one option that you could possibly consider is using a different
provider to surefire.

A provider is a class which knows how to run a set of tests. There is a
provider for JUnit3, JUnit pre 4.7 and JUnit post 4.7. JUnit post 4.7 uses
the JUnitCore, which you could replace with your own version, which inserts
the same rule everywhere.

It seems (at first glance) to be a better way to get global behaviour from
your jenkins server.

Matthew Farwell.


2013/4/30 Henning Groß <igaffai< at >googlemail.com>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*

Re: Externally activated (global) rules

Henning Groß — 2013-04-30T07:16:52

Hi Kevin!
Thank you very much for your feedback! First some words to the environment:

In the project I need the feature we currently have 9 developers and it
might be more. Even freelancers. There are something around 20k tests. What
we want to achieve is to enable a global timeout rule that applies
different timeouts to tests depending on their category (eg SlowTests.class
may take longer than other tests). Also there are other things to take into
consideration (eg is some context already loaded, otherwise the timeout
will be increased).
This rule already exists and is registered in some abstract base class. Its
working fine.
Having this amount of tests makes it very hard to make sure that every
class is annotated with it. Also not all tests inherit from the abstract
test class and I would like to keep it that way. It would be just some work
to put the rule in every test but what about tests written in the future.
I need to make sure that the rule is applied to every test especially when
the developer forg

Re: Externally activated (global) rules

Kevin Cooney — 2013-04-29T16:06:33

Henning,

Sorry for the lack of response. JUnit is maintained by volunteers, and
sometimes our day jobs get busy. I was waiting for David to respond (I am a
sometimes contributor) but here are my thoughts.

This is an interesting idea. Note that you could get what you want with a
custom runner.

My concern with adding Rules via system properties that someone running the
tests in their IDE would see different results compared to the test runs
from Maven. Sure, you could tell your IDE to run the tests with the same
system properties, but it would be unexpected for most people to have to
take a special step to make the tests run the same way as they did in the
continuous build.

Could you find some way to define the global rules via code? Perhaps you
could add a DynamicRule to all of your tests that could apply the addition
rules. Alternatively, you could have a class in the same package as the
tests that defined the global rules for tests in that package (though I'm
not sure there is a platform-independent way

Externally activated (global) rules

Henning Groß — 2013-04-29T14:09:04

Hi!
I have a use-case where I need to enable rules based on external
parameters. Therefore I cannot activate them in code. I have submitted a
pull request:

https://github.com/junit-team/junit/pull/668/files

There are some little things to fix but its an easy and functional
extension. Anyone mind to fix the code to a state that will get merged? I
did not get any feedback until now. Whole team in holidays?

Also I am wondering when 4.12 will be released. Any plans?

Regards and thank you!
Henning.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send

new JUnit book

Tomek Kaczanowski — 2013-04-25T19:00:01

Hi All,

I'm happy to inform you that my book "Practical Unit Testing with
JUnit and Mockito" is available now! http://practicalunittesting.com

I would like to say loud "thank you" to all people who post on this
list. I learned a great deal from you!

In the last few months I have noticed much more activity from JUnit
developers and users, and this is one of the reasons which convinced
me to write a JUnit book. Congratulations and keep up the good job!

The book contains a lot of unit-testing goodness and uses JUnit as
*the* unit testing framework. It shows how to write unit tests with
and without mocks, presents matchers, useful patterns, best practices
(but also bashes some bad ideas), and discusses common issues. I hope
you enjoy it!

Re: Annotation driven Junit Test cases

sourabh — 2013-04-25T06:24:28

Appreciate your feedback and everyone else who commented on my suggestion. Although we were planning upon implementing support for asserting on complex objects too,but the concern regarding the source code getting complex to read with a "test concern" that may not really belong there is quite valid.

I am putting our effort on hold for the time being.

--- In junit< at >yahoogroups.com, Henning Groß <igaffai< at >...> wrote:




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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

Re: Annotation driven Junit Test cases

Matthew Farwell — 2013-04-24T16:07:14

+1. I'd like more explanation as well.

If you're looking for property testing, and you don't mind writing scala,
then you could do worse than Scalacheck:

https://github.com/rickynils/scalacheck/wiki/User-Guide

Scalacheck generates the input data for you. For instance:

scala> val propSqrt = forAll { (n: Int) => scala.Math.sqrt(n*n) == n }

which will fail, because scalacheck will try -1.

scala> propSqrt.check
! Falsified after 1 passed tests:

Matthew Farwell.

2013/4/24 Tomek Kaczanowski <kaczanowski.tomek< at >gmail.com>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubsc

Re: Annotation driven Junit Test cases

mureinik — 2013-04-24T15:33:14

First timer here at JUnit, please excuse any faux-pas.

I was wondering if you aren't concerned about clattering your production code with testing annotations, JUnit dependencies, etc.

--- In junit< at >yahoogroups.com, Henning Groß <igaffai< at >...> wrote:




------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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

Re: Annotation driven Junit Test cases

David Saff — 2013-04-24T15:31:57

SG,

At this point, I think you should try to bootstrap your project outside of
JUnit.  Once something is in core JUnit, I try hard to guarantee that it is
very unlikely to change in breaking ways, and this big an idea, at this
early a stage, that degree of calcification is the last thing you want.

If you find yourself tempted to make changes to core JUnit code in order to
get the extension points that you need, please open pull requests for
individual changes.

Good luck!

   David


On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 2:16 AM, sourabh <sourabh707< at >yahoo.com> wrote:



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatur

Re: Annotation driven Junit Test cases

Henning Groß — 2013-04-24T10:54:59

You need to fork the junit repo on github and file a pull request. I do not
like the idea too much, tho. It puts a lot of waste in the code and i dont
believe in many use-cases where a test case is that simple.
Am 24.04.2013 12:50 schrieb "sourabh" <sourabh707< at >yahoo.com>:



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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

Re: Annotation driven Junit Test cases

Tomek Kaczanowski — 2013-04-24T11:04:27

Hi,

could you please explain what happens after you annotate the code like this:

< at >AutoTest
< at >InputParams
< at >AutoAssert
public int add(int a,int b)
Are tests automatically generated? What test cases are created? What
assertions?

Annotation driven Junit Test cases

sourabh — 2013-04-24T06:16:12

Hi,

My team has recently started work on trying to extend Junit to support all inclusive annotation driven testing of a method in Java. 

What I mean is that if we have a method 

public int add(int a ,int b)

then, instead of having to write a separate class for testing it, we would like to annotate the method as follows

< at >AutoTest
< at >InputParams
< at >AutoAssert
public int add(int a,int b)

The responsibility of setting up junit to understand and execute this set of annotation would be delegated t our custom Runner. 

The example above is quite basic as we plan to support testing for complex input objects that are seeded using an XML file.

We are in pretty advanced stages of completing this implementation. Please let me know how can we share our code for approvals/reviews with the Junit community.

Thanks,
SG



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditiona

Re: API documentation up-to-date?

Mirko Friedenhagen — 2013-04-20T10:16:41

I did comment on #570 as it seems related. I see there are 185 open issues
already, that is the price for junit's success, probably ;-).

Regards Mirko

Re: API documentation up-to-date?

David Saff — 2013-04-19T15:33:47

Excellent point.  Do you have a moment to raise a bug report at
github.com/junit-team/junit/issues ?  Thanks,

   David


On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Mirko Friedenhagen <mfriedenhagen< at >gmail.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

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

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junit/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    junit-digest< at >yahoogroups.com 
    junit-fullfeatured< at >yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    junit-unsubscribe< at >yahoogroups.com

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