shale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mike Kienenberger" <mkien...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Why is AbstractJsfTestCase.suite() defined?
Date Fri, 18 Aug 2006 19:13:17 GMT
On 8/18/06, Craig McClanahan <craigmcc@apache.org> wrote:
> At some point in my use of JUnit (early 3.x versions), I was having problems
> with abstract base classes that didn't have a suite() method ... IIRC, any
> test methods of the base class were getting skipped.  Thus, I made it a
> habit in my own practice to always require concrete classes to provide their
> own suite() methods.  Maybe things are different with 3.8.1.  I'll
> experiment with removing this to see if it breaks anything.

Sounds reasonable.  Junit might still be broken.

If that's the case, I'd recommend declaring suite() abstract.

Also, for ease of use, the javadocs could show the simplest
implementation of suite().   At first I thought I was going to have to
manually add each new test to this method before I realized that
TestSuite(Class) would do this for me.

   public static Test suite() {
       return (new TestSuite(<YourTest>.class));
   }

I'll also try to clean up the MyFaces subclasses when I get a chance
so they're not demonstrating the wrong approach by returning null.

Mime
View raw message