12 Jan
2015
12 Jan
'15
9:16 a.m.
Hi Vincent,
There is a potential issue using such construction, but if you are aware,
it look nicer than the try/catch, and I should have use it already form
time to time when writing test for XWiki.
The drawback is explained in this article:
http://jakegoulding.com/blog/2012/09/26/be-careful-when-using-junit-expecte…
.
The article propose an idea to avoid the issue, maybe we would like to
implement it in our testing module ?
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 12:51 PM, vincent(a)massol.net <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
Hi devs,
I’d like to propose that we use the strategy described at
https://github.com/junit-team/junit/wiki/Exception-testing (thanks to
Lyes for pointing out this page to me).
For example:
@Test
public void sendSynchronousWithErrors() throws Exception
{
...
this.thrown.expect(MessagingException.class);
this.thrown.expectMessage("Some messages have failed to be sent
for the following reasons: "
+
"[[[errorsummary1],[errordescription1]][[errorsummary2],[errordescription2]]]");
this.mocker.getComponentUnderTest().send(Arrays.asList(message),
session);
}
I feel it’s slightly better than our current idiom based on try/catch. One
advantage is that we cannot forget to put the fail().
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO