RE: [Fwd: RE: [MO-java-dev] Location of test source]

[<Vin...@ge...>]

Jeff,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: moc...@li...
> [mailto:moc...@li...]On Behalf Of
> Jeff Martin
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 5:09 AM
> To: MockObjects
> Subject: Re: [Fwd: RE: [MO-java-dev] Location of test source]
>
>
> Why would I want to compile tests selectively. The only things I might
> want to do in sections is core then jdk and then j2ee.

Let me rephrase. You can build selectively quite easily. You compile
src/java to a build dir and generate the mock jar from the build dir.
Excluding tests in the jar is just the question of not compiling src/test to
the same build dir.
It's just convenient, I'm not saying it's the only way to do it though.

>
> The way the build should work is, you never attempt to
> compile the code,
> you attempt to run the tests. This means compilation is a prerequisite
> of testing not and end in itself.
>
> If you put tests in another directory not just the same package your
> removing them from direct sight. You can arrange and ide to
> make it look
> like it's in the same directory, but you don't have to, so there's a
> good chance people won't.

I agree it does require extra care.

> There's also people like me who don't use an
> ide.

Try IntelliJ ;-)

> I don't want to give people an option of looking at tests, I want
> to force them to do it.

I see your point and that's an issue with the solution proposed. In that
case go for the tests in the same directory, which I think is better than
having them in a test dir.

-- Vincent

>
>
> On Thu, 2002-04-11 at 01:08, Vincent Tence wrote:
> > Guess I have to learn to use Reply to All correctly :-)
> > ----
> >
>
> > From: Vincent Tence <vt...@sy...>
> > To: rin...@me...
> > Subject: RE: [MO-java-dev] Location of test source
> > Date: 10 Apr 2002 08:20:49 -0400
> >
> > I second that. That way tests lie in the same packages as
> sources and
> > ant can easily compiles the source selectively.
> >
> > Vincent
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 06:55, rin...@me... wrote:
> > > Hello Jeff,
> > >
> > > > I'm currently seperating out the jdk classes from the
> core mockobject
> > > > classes hopefully we'll end up with something like this.
> > > >
> > > > src/core/
> > > > src/jdk/common/
> > > >        /1.1/
> > > >        /1.2/
> > > >        /1.3/
> > > >        /1.4/
> > > > src/j2ee/common
> > > >         /1.2/
> > > >         /1.3/
> > > >
> > >
> > > What about appending each of this folders with java and
> test, like they do
> > > in a number of Apache projects? e.g:
> > >
> > > src/core/java
> > > src/core/test
> > > src/jdk/common/java
> > > src/jdk/common/test
> > > ...
> > >
> > > In Apache style, configuration files are placed in a
> third subdirectory
> > > named conf, e.g.
> > >
> > > src/core/conf
> > > src/jdk/common/conf
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Within each of these subdirectories you can take the same
> package structure.
> > > Then you don't have to filter on the source files to
> distinguish between
> > > production and test code.
> > >
> > > Ringg
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> > > Moc...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev
> >
> --
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> Moc...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev
>