|
|
| Re: Missing steps in test behavior [message #73191 is a reply to message #68796] |
Mon, 05 June 2006 12:40   |
 Bertrand Quenin
Messages: 70
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Yes, i'm aware about this. What i meant was to introduce this concept in
the TPTP model. Setup and TearDown methods are not specifical to JUnit
tests. Setup and Teardown (or whatever, close, end, finish, etc.) steps
should be, in my opinion, present in the TPTP behavior model as mandatory
steps, i.e. for all test types (Web, Manual, auto gui, etc.) and then
mapped to the chosen technology.
Paul Slauenwhite wrote:
> Hi Bertrand,
> In fact, the same methods (e.g. setUp() and tearDown()) are used in TPTP
> JUnit tests. The behavior of a TPTP JUnit test models the execution
> sequence and its synchronization. The methods of the generated JUnit test
> class are invoked using this behavior but still following the existing JUnit
> execution conventions:
> 1) setUp()
> 2) testMyTest()
> 3) tearDown()
> Paul
> "Bertrand Quenin" <bquenin@axway.com> wrote in message
> news:2e820e600ee5fb15e20f93b0d7856df3$1@www.eclipse.org...
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I think that test behavior lakcs two important steps in the behavior.
>> I"m speaking about test "begin" and test "end". Indeed, these concepts
>> exist in JUnit formality under the "setUp" and "tierDown" methods. I think
>> it's a mandatory step in a test suite that should be present in each test
>> type. What do you think about it and i'm sorry if it has already been
>> submitted as a feature enhancment.
>>
>> Regards.
>> BQ.
>>
|
|
|
| Re: Missing steps in test behavior [message #73636 is a reply to message #73191] |
Fri, 09 June 2006 13:01 |
Paul Slauenwhite
Messages: 975
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Bertrand,
This can be modeled using the current behavioral model by creating a
test for each setup and tear down and reference these 'tests' before and
after the actual test invocation.
If this solution is not suitable, please feel free to open a TPTP
enhancement.
Paul
"Bertrand Quenin" <bquenin@axway.com> wrote in message
news:e82dc2465998ac5a373ae80cbd5bafe7$1@www.eclipse.org...
> Yes, i'm aware about this. What i meant was to introduce this concept in
> the TPTP model. Setup and TearDown methods are not specifical to JUnit
> tests. Setup and Teardown (or whatever, close, end, finish, etc.) steps
> should be, in my opinion, present in the TPTP behavior model as mandatory
> steps, i.e. for all test types (Web, Manual, auto gui, etc.) and then
> mapped to the chosen technology.
>
> Paul Slauenwhite wrote:
>
> > Hi Bertrand,
> > In fact, the same methods (e.g. setUp() and tearDown()) are used in
TPTP
> > JUnit tests. The behavior of a TPTP JUnit test models the execution
> > sequence and its synchronization. The methods of the generated JUnit
test
> > class are invoked using this behavior but still following the existing
JUnit
> > execution conventions:
>
> > 1) setUp()
> > 2) testMyTest()
> > 3) tearDown()
>
> > Paul
> > "Bertrand Quenin" <bquenin@axway.com> wrote in message
> > news:2e820e600ee5fb15e20f93b0d7856df3$1@www.eclipse.org...
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I think that test behavior lakcs two important steps in the
behavior.
> >> I"m speaking about test "begin" and test "end". Indeed, these concepts
> >> exist in JUnit formality under the "setUp" and "tierDown" methods. I
think
> >> it's a mandatory step in a test suite that should be present in each
test
> >> type. What do you think about it and i'm sorry if it has already been
> >> submitted as a feature enhancment.
> >>
> >> Regards.
> >> BQ.
> >>
>
>
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03936 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
