asunit-users — This list is for the users of AsUnit that are not involved in it's development.

Re: [Asunit-users] Re: assertEquals and non primitive data

[beRt b. <beR...@al...>]

Hmmmmm,

on second thoughts: I don't think this is a good idea.
Flash is flexible enough to call equals() on any object without the 
interface, so why intoduce it? I think the burden of using asUnit should 
be kept as low as possible...

Also about the default behaviour I have doubts on my previous proposal
testing all the members on equality: how deep do we go?
We can't go endless since we can have circular references...
Also: do we have to test if they are the same object?

So here's my new proposal: if the object has an equals() function, call 
it, and otherwise just check if they refer to the same instance as now.
That's also the behaviour you see in JUnit, and it's always nice to have 
an equals() method on your objects...

Kind regards,
Bert.

Luke Bayes wrote:

>>What about defining an interface Comparable that
>>has a method equals() in it? If you want to define your own definition
>>of equals(), you simply implement Comparable.
>>assertEquals should then check if the object is an instance of
>>Comparable, and if so, call equals(). Else it could take your approach.
> 
> 
> This sounds better to me too...
> 
> 
>>Anyway, I would like it a lot if assertEquals() could at least make a
>>message using the toString() methods of both objects instead of an empty
>>message when the test fails...
> 
> 
> I also would agree with that. 
> 
> Bert, how would you feel about pulling down the latest source from CVS
> and sending me these enhancements?
> 
> I'd be glad to walk you through the CVS connection.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> Luke Bayes
> www.asunit.com
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> The SF.Net email is sponsored by: Beat the post-holiday blues
> Get a FREE limited edition SourceForge.net t-shirt from ThinkGeek.
> It's fun and FREE -- well, almost....http://www.thinkgeek.com/sfshirt
> _______________________________________________
> Asunit-users mailing list
> Asu...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/asunit-users
> 

Re: [Asunit-users] Re: assertEquals and non primitive data

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

> What about defining an interface Comparable that
> has a method equals() in it? If you want to define your own definition
> of equals(), you simply implement Comparable.
> assertEquals should then check if the object is an instance of
> Comparable, and if so, call equals(). Else it could take your approach.

This sounds better to me too...

> Anyway, I would like it a lot if assertEquals() could at least make a
> message using the toString() methods of both objects instead of an empty
> message when the test fails...

I also would agree with that. 

Bert, how would you feel about pulling down the latest source from CVS
and sending me these enhancements?

I'd be glad to walk you through the CVS connection.

Thanks,


Luke Bayes
www.asunit.com

[Asunit-users] Re: assertEquals and non primitive data

[beRt b. <beR...@al...>]

 > So we could use a recursive for-in check to validate this method
 > correctly if test is made on object datatype.

I don't fully agree. What about defining an interface Comparable that 
has a method equals() in it? If you want to define your own definition 
of equals(), you simply implement Comparable.
assertEquals should then check if the object is an instance of 
Comparable, and if so, call equals(). Else it could take your approach.

Anyway, I would like it a lot if assertEquals() could at least make a 
message using the toString() methods of both objects instead of an empty 
message when the test fails...

Kind regards,
Bert Bruynooghe.

Re: [Asunit-users] Throwing exceptions spoils test?

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

Hey Bert,

I definitely owe you an apology!

I misread your email and thought you were talking about compile
errors, not runtime exception handling. This was entirely my fault and
I'm sorry for not reading more carefully...

You are absolutely correct, the unit test framework *should* handle
uncaught Flash 7 exceptions. This issue was raised in the past and I
think that it will continue to come up until we resolve it.

We do have some big decisions to make surrounding this problem. We
originally designed this system to help us develop Flash applications
for PDAs (Which only run Flash 6.x currently). We also understand that
a still-significant number of developers are being forced to develop
for the Flash 6 player on the web.

Unfortunately, The Flash 6 player cannot handle Macromedia's runtime
exception handling as those commands are features of Flash 7.x and
up...

I wonder if there is some way to branch *just* exception handling?

Perhaps we could create an abstract "ExceptionTestCase" that handles
runtime exceptions, but doesn't automatically get included in the
exported .swf file unless it's referenced. This way we could continue
to support the Flash 6.x runtime for most users, but also could
support this feature?

If anyone else has thoughts, opinions or ideas on this, I would love
to hear them as this has clearly been asked for by the community.


Thanks for your patience and response on this,


Luke Bayes
www.asunit.com

Re: [Asunit-users] Throwing exceptions spoils test?

[beRt b. <beR...@al...>]

Luke Bayes wrote:
...
> Actually, I believe that the Flash IDE does not complete the
> compilation of your .swf file if there is a significant exception.
I don't get this. How is the compiler going to track we're having a 
runtime exception? ( Things like: throw new Error ("could not connect to 
server");)

> The process of Unit Testing requires that you get a good compile
> first. Unit testing is designed to test the "functionality" of a small
> chunk of code. If there are "syntax" or "structural" errors, the
> compiler is supposed to catch those first. These other, higher-level
> errors should be fixed before continuing with another Unit Test.
> 
> To answer your question specifically, yes - you are seeing the desired
> behavior, and no - it's not a bug, it's a feature. ;-)
I doubt whether it is really "desired": e.g. JUnit fails the test when 
an uncaught exception occurs. I know MacroMedia's implementation of an 
exception rippling through to the top layer is quite awkward, but 
skipping of a test due to this is unacceptable. Suppose one of your 
collegues changed the behaviour of an underlying function so it throws 
an exception in some cases. He'll never know if he screwed up, because 
he won't get any red when running the tests!

Anyway, for now, I'll write all my tests as folows:
try{
	...
}catch (e:Object{
	fail();
}

Kind regards,
Bert Bruynooghe.

Re: [Asunit-users] Throwing exceptions spoils test?

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

Hey There Bert,

Thanks for posting your question. Please keep letting us know as you
come up with more of them!

Actually, I believe that the Flash IDE does not complete the
compilation of your .swf file if there is a significant exception.

The process of Unit Testing requires that you get a good compile
first. Unit testing is designed to test the "functionality" of a small
chunk of code. If there are "syntax" or "structural" errors, the
compiler is supposed to catch those first. These other, higher-level
errors should be fixed before continuing with another Unit Test.

To answer your question specifically, yes - you are seeing the desired
behavior, and no - it's not a bug, it's a feature. ;-)


Thanks again,


Luke Bayes
www.asunit.com

[Asunit-users] Throwing exceptions spoils test?

[beRt b. <beR...@al...>]

Hi all,

Being a newbie on AsUnit, I discovered that when an error/exception was 
thrown during a test, the test is aborted without taking the result into 
account. In other words: the test is simply ignored, when I expected the 
test to fail instead.
Is this a glitch of this implementation of AsUnit, and is there a way to 
  counter this kind of problems?

Kind regards,
Bert Bruynooghe.

Re: [Asunit-users] assertEquals and non primitive data

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

I'll take a look at this over the next week.


Thanks for bringing it up!


Luke Bayes
www.asunit.com

Re: [Asunit-users] Unit testing French documentation

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

This look great!

I'm really excited to have such extensive support in French. I'm going
to try to get some similar detailed documentation out in English over
the holiday break.


Thanks Erixtekila!

Luke Bayes
www.asunit.com

[Asunit-users] Unit testing French documentation

[erixtekila <eri...@if...>]

Hi all,


For those interested, I've documented some unit testing use on my blog.
Here is the url : http://www.v-i-a.net/blog
Primarly, it was just for self documentary purpose.

But since it's been writen like a note recipe, one could take good 
techniques there.
It's not a big deal, but it should help to start.
So I've decided to put the url publicly.
Since, I'll get more time, i'll update the content.

This blog is a sort of DocBlog or personal NoteBlog about Flash OOP.
See this mail not like an annoncement, just my participation to this 
opensource framework effort for the community.
Thanks the authors.


Best regards.

[Asunit-users] assertEquals and non primitive data

[erixtekila <eri...@if...>]

Hi,


I was looking in assertEquals implementaion and discovered that in fact 
assertEquals works the same way that assertSame.
I think it's not the desired behaviour.

In my opinion,
When talking of object reference, assertSame should passes when obj1 
=== obj2.
It's a reference test.
Nevertheless, assertEquals should test contents, not reference in 
memory.
That way, assertEquals(obj1 , obj2) should passes only if all 
properties of obj1 has the same value than obj2.

Unfortunaly, we don't get a native clone method in AS2, but the test 
should passes only if :
obj2=clone(obj1);
assertEquals(obj1, obj2);

So we could use a recursive for-in check to validate this method 
correctly if test is made on object datatype.

I think it should be the expected behaviour.


Tell me what you think.


Cheers

Re: [Asunit-users] MovieClip utility ?!

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

------------------------------
This message was from erixtekila but was unable to be sent through the
list because of attached Images

I've posted the images to the web server and replaced them with links.

Thanks so much for taking to time to take these captures, I'll add
links to them in the built-in readme as well.

Luke Bayes
www.asunit.com
------------------------------


Hi Luke,

Thanx for this clear and clean explanation.
In fact, your comparison on MovieClip type vs Class is a daily basis
for .as developpers.
The need you felt to explain things in such a detail way, should come
from my bad question.
I apologize.

What I was (trying to) saying is just : what is the workflow when using
asunit framework ?
I anderstand now that the poor xul implementation of MM drive you to
deal with UI difficulties.

So my feeling is that a little documentation should clear things a
little.
When one will try to implement the framework, they'll get trouble.

I tell you what i've anderstood, see inline screenshots :
- Hide quoted text -

> Basically, what we're trying to expose in our "Create Class" command
> is the ability for people to:
>
> 1) Create Classes that are NOT MovieClips

http://www.asunit.com/docs/img/simpleclass.jpg


> 2) Create Classes that are MovieClips and exist in the Library

http://www.asunit.com/docs/img/extendsmovieclip-lib.jpg


> 3) Create Classes that are MovieClips and don't exist in the Library

http://www.asunit.com/docs/img/extendsmovieclip-nonlib.jpg


Am I right ?
In my experience of using asunit, that's work just fine.
> Unfortunately, our Template code is very simple and inelegant and we
> have a priority to try and keep it that way. So our auto-created
> TestCase does not actually instantiate MovieClips properly - hence the
> example to show folks how that might be done using a more efficient
> factory. (Found on TestCase)
I think that the TestCase example shouldn't mention to check "Add
Library=E2=80=A6".

To finish, i would like to thank you work, which is really valuable.
Actually, i find the serialisable property and the Object.registerClass
really wonderfull.
>
> We provide access to this "hack" using relatively elegant (methinks)
> solution by storing the result of the registration in a static member
> named, "serializable"... This registration can also apply to
> non-MovieClip classes that you would like to store in
> LocalSharedObjects, RemoteSharedObjects and LocalConnectionObjects...
In fact, it is really elegant=E2=80=A6
Anyone should implement its class with this, in case of future code
refactoring.

>
> I agree wholeheartedly that our User Interface should show some
> exclusivity on these selections, and would be glad to see your
> suggested improvements. It's a little difficult because Macromedia did
> not give us a complete "XUL" implementation, they just gave us a XUL
> "Dialog" - but in spite of that, I think that what you're asking for
> could be implemented.
Is there a comboBox in the XUL of MM ?
That way, you could make :
- "Create simple Class" as defalut value.
- "Create and subclass library MovieClip" as 2nd one
- "Subclass MovieClip Class  without library symbol (Advanced use
only)" as 3rd.

My 2cents.

Cheers.

Re: [Asunit-users] MovieClip utility ?!

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

Hey There,

You're absolutely right to be confused, this matter is very confusing...

I'm going to try to separate this problem into smaller peices if I can.

Basically, what we're talking about is MovieClips.

Because of the rendering Engine built into Flash, we can logically
break up any objects in a Flash Application into 2 types:

1 - MovieClip 
2 - Non-MovieClip.

The only major difference between MovieClips and Non-MovieClips is
that you must use the MovieClip Factory
(MovieClipInstance.attachMovie(args); ) to actually instantiate a
MovieClip and have it render on Stage. *You CAN instantiated classes
that extend MovieClip without using this factory, but they won't
render because they're not a member of the composite MovieClip
structure that begins at Stage.

Within the MovieClip type, there are actually 2 subtypes based on
their definition.

1 - MovieClips that exist in a .FLA library as a Symbol
2 - MovieClips that exist only as an ActionScript file that extends MovieClip

MovieClips that exist in a .FLA library, do not need any linkageId,
classRef or serializable properties as they will be imported when the
.FLA is compiled.

In order for MovieClips that exist only in ActionScript to be imported
into a Library and registered as a valid "attachable" (and actually a
"serializable") element, one must call
Object.registerClass(someUniqueLinkageId,
theConstructorOrClassDefinition)...

We provide access to this "hack" using relatively elegant (methinks)
solution by storing the result of the registration in a static member
named, "serializable"... This registration can also apply to
non-MovieClip classes that you would like to store in
LocalSharedObjects, RemoteSharedObjects and LocalConnectionObjects...

There are at least two reasons to extend MovieClip in your Class definition:

1) You want the compiler to not fail when you try to access the
Methods and Properties of the MovieClip object.
2) You want your IDE (PrimalScript) to provide code hinting for member
methods and properties that exist on MovieClip.

Basically, what we're trying to expose in our "Create Class" command
is the ability for people to:

1) Create Classes that are NOT MovieClips
2) Create Classes that are MovieClips and exist in the Library
3) Create Classes that are MovieClips and don't exist in the Library

Unfortunately, our Template code is very simple and inelegant and we
have a priority to try and keep it that way. So our auto-created
TestCase does not actually instantiate MovieClips properly - hence the
example to show folks how that might be done using a more efficient
factory. (Found on TestCase)

I agree wholeheartedly that our User Interface should show some
exclusivity on these selections, and would be glad to see your
suggested improvements. It's a little difficult because Macromedia did
not give us a complete "XUL" implementation, they just gave us a XUL
"Dialog" - but in spite of that, I think that what you're asking for
could be implemented.

Please let me know if this does or does not answer your question.


Thanks,


Luke Bayes
www.asunit.com

[Asunit-users] MovieClip utility ?!

[erixtekila <eri...@if...>]

hi,


As I'm testing the framework, i'm aking what is the purpose of=20
assigning serializable member whatever you checked when using "Create=20
Class" command ?
Is it for the LocalConnection objet of the Asunit GUI window ?
Or only to link the movieclip datatype with its subclass ?

this is the result of creating a class without adding a movieclip=20
symbol.
<code>
import com.yourdomain.yourproject.*;

class YourClass {
	public static var linkageId:String =3D=20
"com.yourdomain.yourproject.YourClass";
	public static var classRef:Function =3D YourClass;

	public function YourClass() {
	}
=09
	public static var serializable:Boolean =3D=20
Object.registerClass(linkageId, classRef);
}
</code>

So then, if we don't want to use "Add to Library as MovieClip" in the=20
xul alert command, we'll have necessary use "Prefix Class Name with=20
__Package".

So here my question :
Does the framework NEED a movieclip to extends ?
What is the preferred way to test class that are not belonging from=20
movieclips ?
Should we have to extend ALL Class from MovieClip Class ?

I know that the compiler creates such a  "__Package." movieclip to=20
simulate package in flash and import the code with #init pragma before=20=

all vector initialized.
But since, we use class only code, what's the purpose of activating =20
"Prefix Class Name with __Package" ? The compiler will do it for you !
I must have missed something.
Can you clarify things a little on this.

And perhaps on the xul interface, there should have a radiobutton with=20=

the alternative of :
-  "Add to Library as MovieClip"
or
- "Prefix Class Name with __Package"
or
- "Don't use MovieClip datatype automatic binding"


Perhaps, my misunderstanding comes from the first example you provide=20
in the README.txt :
<excerpt>
---------------------------------------
QUICKSTART INSTRUCTIONS:
---------------------------------------
(...)
  - Select:
  	"Automatically Open New Files"
  	"Add to Library as MovieClip"
  	"Add new Test
  	and be sure that "Prefix Class Name with __Packages" is =
deselected.
</excerpt>
Why do we have to check "Add to Library=85" since ExampleClass won't be =
a=20
MovieClip ?
The tests are not oriented to test is MovieClipness=85 ;=ACp



Help me on this please.


Thanx a lot.=

[Asunit-users] Macromedia Exchange

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

Just wanted to let everyone know, we're official!

We just got posted to the Macromedia Exchange today. We are working
out some details surrounding the actual page, but check out the
following url and maybe throw a positive vote in there for us!

http://www.macromedia.com/cfusion/exchange/index.cfm#view=sn111&viewName=Flash%20Extension&loc=en_us&authorid=0&page=0&scrollPos=0&subcatid=0&snid=sn111&itemnumber=-1&extid=1018126&catid=52

I think that with our latest release of version 2.4, we have a pretty
strong version and we're ready to start spreading the word in earnest.

Please let us know if you encounter any issues with the current
release and make sure to tell everyone you know about us whenever you
can!


Thanks again,


Luke Bayes and Ali Mills
www.asunit.com

[Asunit-users] Re: Executing setUp and tearDown only once.

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

That's not supported in the current implementation, but if you want to
add that class, it should be very simple to write.

Just extend TestCase and change the routine that calls each method so
that it only calls setup and teardown outside of the for..in loop.

I haven't tested this, but here's what I was thinking:

import com.asunit.framework.*;

 class TestSetup extends TestCase {
 
 
	private function runMethod(method:String)
	{
		setCurrentMethod(method);
		this[method]();
	}

	private function run()
	{
		var mList:Array = getMethods();
		setUp();
		for(var i=0; i<mList.length; i++) {
			runMethod(mList[i]);
		}
		tearDown();
	}
}

Now your concrete Test class should extend TestSetup rather than TestCase.

If someone is interested in this, let me know if it works.

I think it's important to mention two things here:
1) This is actually a relatively unsafe operation because now your
test methods will be operating on a configuration serially and may
alter the configuration for the next test method.
2) This is NOT asynchronous, so it won't allow you to perform some
asynchronous operation like loading XML for your tests to consume.


Let me know how it goes.


lb.
www.asunit.com

[Asunit-users] Executing setUp and tearDown only once.

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

This is a question from one of our users:


Is this available in ASUnit?

4.7 One-Time Set Up and Tear Down
4.7.1 Problem
You want to run some setup code one time and then run several tests.
You only want to run your cleanup code after all of the tests are
finished.

4.7.2 Solution
Use the junit.extensions.TestSetup class.

4.7.3 Discussion
As outlined in Recipe 4.6, JUnit calls setUp( ) before each test, and
tearDown( ) after each test. In some cases you might want to call a
special setup method once before a series of tests, and then call a
teardown method once after all tests are complete. The
junit.extensions.TestSetup class supports this requirement. Example
4-4 shows how to use this technique.

Example 4-4. One-time set up and tear down
package com.oreilly.javaxp.junit;

import com.oreilly.javaxp.common.Person;
import junit.extensions.TestSetup;
import junit.framework.Test;
import junit.framework.TestCase;
import junit.framework.TestSuite;

public class TestPerson extends TestCase {

    public void testGetFullName(  ) { ... }

    public void testNullsInName(  ) { ... }

    public static Test suite(  ) {
        TestSetup setup = new TestSetup(new TestSuite(TestPerson.class)) {
            protected void setUp(  ) throws Exception {
                // do your one-time setup here!
            }

            protected void tearDown(  ) throws Exception {
                // do your one-time tear down here!
            }
        };
        return setup;
    }
}


TestSetup is a subclass of junit.extensions.TestDecorator, which is a
base class for defining custom tests. The main reason for extending
TestDecorator is to gain the ability to execute code before or after a
test is run.[4] The setUp( ) and tearDown( ) methods of TestSetup are
called before and after whatever Test is passed to its constructor. In
our example we pass a TestSuite to the TestSetup constructor:

[4] JUnit includes source code. Check out the code for TestSetup to
learn how to create your own extension of TestDecorator.

TestSetup setup = new TestSetup(new TestSuite(TestPerson.class)) {


This means that TestSetup's setUp( ) method is called once before the
entire suite, and tearDown( ) is called once afterwards. It is
important to note that the setUp( ) and tearDown( ) methods within
TestPerson are still executed before and after each individual unit
test method within TestPerson.


Thanks,
[AsUnit User]

Re: [Asunit-users] Loading before executing tests

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

mockData is the variable that contains the reference to the original
XML object shown here:

 mockData = new ModuleData(mockDataSrc, this);

This is a member variable that continues to exist after the run method
is called.

ModuleData is a custom class that extends XML and calls renderNode
from the onLoad handler.




lb.
www.asunit.com

RE: [Asunit-users] Loading before executing tests

[Bahman Z. <ba...@xi...>]

Hi Luke,

Trying to create the class you suggested but I'm running into a problem. It
might be that I didn't understand the instructions.

The issue is that when I run the test (compile my fla), the node parameter
of the renderNode function contains the xml that I wanted to load. What I
don't understand and is how the xml gets into mockData that is being used in
the setUp function.

Thanks in advance,
Bahman

[Asunit-users] Loading before executing tests

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

Hey All,

Received this on my personal email - thought I'd share it with the group.


Hi Luke,

Well, I've had a chance to catch up on some reading and have started
implementing the framework in my project. At this point I'm trying to
run some setup code, run some tests and then teardown after all the
tests. For example I want to load an xml file, construct an object
passing the xml to it and then use that object in my tests and at the
end delete the object. This seems to be what the TestSuite.as should
do but I can't figure out how to use it. Do you have a sample that
uses the TestSuite class?

[AsUnit User]

[Asunit-users] Re: Loading before executing tests

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

Hey [AsUnit User],

The TestSuite class is extended by the automated "AllTests.as" classes.

Basically, if you load the xml document and store it as a member
variable on a TestCase, it will be destroyed when the TestCase is
destroyed.

The setUp and tearDown methods are called before and after *each*
"test____" method is called within a TestCase, not before *all*
"test___" methods are called.


The TestCase class code to do this might look like what follows:

	
	// Override the run method of TestCase and get your external data
	private function run():Void {
		// Created a custom class called *ModuleData* that 
		// extends XML and does the following:
		// 1) set the URL TO LOAD = 1st arg in constructor
		// 2) set controller = 2nd arg in constructor
		// 3) call controller.renderNode(this); when xml is loaded
		// Put the instance into a member variable that test functions
		// know to look for. 
		// This object is consumed by members, but not modified by them. 

		mockData = new ModuleData(mockDataSrc, this);
	}
	
	// Have an event handler that gets called when you want the test
	// case to execute.
	public function renderNode(node:XMLNode):Void {
		// call the TestCase run method to begin testing.
		super.run();
	}

	// This will be called BEFORE each method that begins with *test*
	public function setUp():Void {
		defaultInstance = new Style();
		// Pass the XML data to the class under test.
		instance = new Style(mockData.firstChild);
		mockClip = StyleMockClip(attachMovie(StyleMockClip.linkageId));
	}

	// This will be called AFTER each method that begins with *test*
	public function tearDown():Void {
		mockClip.removeMovieClip();
		delete defaultInstance;
		delete instance;
	}
	
I hope that helps - this has been a HUGE deal for us in how we write
tests. Very often now we use XML documents to configure our test case
so that we don't have a bunch of Magic Numbers or even worse - XML
STRINGS floating around.


Thanks,

Luke Bayes
www.asunit.com

Re: [Asunit-users] Package specification?

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

Yo David,

You're a ROCKSTAR - the documentation looks great! 

I'll check out the download and let you know how it works.

I think it's hilarious that your two examples are from asunit and
xfactorstudio! That's my old business partner Neeld Tanksley. Neeld
actually built a .NET as-doc util when as2 first came out. You should
fire an email out to him as I'm sure he'd be interested in helping
out.

Good work,

lb.
www.asunit.com

Re: [Asunit-users] Package specification?

[David H. <wa...@us...>]

On Wed, Nov 17, 2004 at 10:41:16AM -0800, Luke Bayes wrote:
> Keep us posted on the progress of that documentation engine, as we'd
> love to take advantage of it for this project and many others!

I spent a bit more time on it during last week, and the results are
starting to look almost presentable.  I also found some software for
bundling up Ruby applications into a single Windows .exe file, and I'd
love to know if the result works for other people (it does for me).


Updated AsUnit API docs:

  http://www.badgers-in-foil.co.uk/projects/as2api/examples/asunit/overview-summary.html


Download page for alpha-version of as2api:

  http://www.badgers-in-foil.co.uk/projects/as2api/


dave

-- 
http://david.holroyd.me.uk/

RE: [Asunit-users] Fwd: [asUnit] HTTP connection

[Thompson, D. <dan...@se...>]

> I personally prefer to be notified and prefer to have others
> notified, but understand if there are some concerns.

> What do you folks think?

I like applications checking versions, but generally appreciate a way to =
turn this feature off.
However, as AsUnit is a young component, I would rather it check without =
asking then not check at all.

[Asunit-users] Version 2.4 Released!

[Luke B. <lb...@gm...>]

Hey Folks,

First off - sorry about all the Updates this week, we are trying NOT
to make a habit of this, but we are working on getting posted to the
Macromedia Exchange and hoping for that before Thanksgiving.

As a result - we are extremely excited to announce the release of Version 2.4!

This release includes fixes to ALL known bugs and issues. The release
notes are shown below. You should get notification to update directly
in your IDE.

Please do the update and let us know if you have any questions or concerns.


Thanks so much!


Luke Bayes & Ali Mills
www.asunit.com


Release Notes:
------------------------------------------------
Version 2.4 November 17, 2004
------------------------------------------------
 - Clicking a failing test in the AsUnit UI no longer throws a JSFL error
 	on Mac (This feature removed from Mac version.)
 - Clicking a failing test in the AsUnit UI will now respect your 
 	"Text Editor" setting from the Create Class Command on Windows. 
 	(requires restart of IDE if this value changes)
 - Create Class no longer crashes when Auto-Opening a file
 - Added Flash IDE revision check so that Create Class no longer fails 
 	mysteriously on < 7.2
 - Create Class no longer locks up on the mac.