[ENH][TEST] ClassBuilder format tests
ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Mon Jan 5 08:20:04 UTC 2004
On 4 janv. 04, at 22:39, Colin Putney wrote:
> On Jan 4, 2004, at 12:37 PM, ducasse wrote:
>> On 4 janv. 04, at 21:23, Andreas Raab wrote:
>>> Hi Stef,
>>>> I was looking at your tests. I want them in the image :)
>>>> I was wondering why you do not use tearDown to clean your stuff.
>>> I needed to clean up inbetween each individual test and tearDown is
>>> called when all the tests are run (e.g., after the entire suite
>> No tearDown is run after each tests. I was forced to extend SUnit to
>> provide the behavior
>> you describe because our test suite was taking too much time, so I'm
>> really sure about this
>> behavior. In fact setU and tearDown are always run before and after
>> each tests because they control
>> the contex.
> Why did you extend SUnit? Was there some reason you couldn't use a
> TestResource to speed up your fixture set up and teardown?
I already explained that to joseph and alan knight (who was always
The problems with testResources is that you cannot control when and the
order when they are setup.
In our system we have a kind of **big** singleton that gets modified by
different operators. When testing these operators
we have to rebuild a large test context and the operators will annotate
it. The problems is that each testcase modifies the singleton
in different way so we end up not been able to able a consistent
context for each of the operator.
I played a lot with TestResources (read the code step it.....) until I
realised that I could not do what I needed with that.
So I extended SUnit, and proposed some hooks because it was not so well
to have hardcoded class references in method bodies.
What I did is described in the SUniit Explained tutorial available on
my web page.
More information about the Squeak-dev