Re: [Oorexx-devel] Proposed New ooRexxUnit Class File

[Mark M. <mie...@gm...>]

On Nov 30, 2007 8:44 AM, David Ashley <da...@us...> wrote:

> I added a new file (ooRexxUnit.cls) to the trunk of the SVN test tree. This
> is just a rough outline (it sure as heck doesn't work yet!) of some things
> that can be improved over the old class. Here are some of the major points.

Taking these a few at a time.

> 4. I am not sure whether or not the old TestSuite class is really necessary,
> I need to look into that a little more.

I think TestSuite, or something similar is needed.  The principle
behind this in junit is that you need an easy way for a user to write
a test case and you also need an easy way for a user to collect
together a bunch of test cases.  I'd like to maintain that, either in
TestSuite, or in a similar class.

> 1. There is only one class in the class file. There is no need for a
> separate Assertion and TestCase class. They both should be combined. I have
> not put in any methods from the old TestCase class into the new class but
> that is the direction I propose.

These are a couple of general comments, I don't have any good,
concrete, objections to your proposals.

1.)  While I agree, and have long thought, that it is a mistake to
slavishly adhere to the exact junit API, I do think that the general
model of junit has survived the test of time.  Because of that, I'm
leery about abandoning too much of the junit model in our re-org.

2.) In general in Object Orientated programming there is a tendency at
times to write one 'God' class, a class that does everything.  I think
there are many adherents to the theory that it is better to have a
number of small objects that do each thing well.  I agree with that
theory.

Now, I don't have any great skill at designing good OO classes and
would never use my designs as an example of what to do.  But, my gut
feeling here is that it might be a mistake to take a number of small
classes and turn them into one big class.

--
Mark Miesfeld