Yesterday I found a bug in test caller. When an expected exception
wasn't caught, it did:
throw new Exception(...) instead of
throw Exception(...).
I went down to the test suite to see why it was not detected. Result:
forgot to put a test case for that one. I'm in the process of correcting
this, but there is no way I can safely distinguish if "new Exception()" or
"Exception()" was thrown. There can only be distinguished by the message.
This can be easily corrected. Exception can be subclassed (as is done by
NotEqualException). What I propose is to define a set of class to
distinguish the exception cause. Here is my proposal:
- Exception : base class for all exception. Contains a message
- FailureException : thrown when an CPPUNIT_ASSERTxxx fails, or when an
expected exception is not caught (this is a form of assertion)
- NotEqualException: a specialization of FailureException for
CPPUNIT_ASSERT_EQUALxxx. Contains expected and actual string.
- UnknownErrorException: thrown when something is caught in a "catch
(...)"
- SetUpException : thrown when a exception is thrown by setUp().
Contains caught exception.
- TearDownException : thrown when an exception is thrown by tearDown().
Contains caught exception.
What do you think ?
Baptiste.
---
Baptiste Lepilleur <gai...@fr...> http://gaiacrtn.free.fr/index.html
Author of The Text Reformatter, a tool for fanfiction readers and writers.
Language: English, French (Well, I'm French).
|
