castor

Add ability to invoke arbitrary user-supplied code in a CTF unit test

Details

  • Type: Sub-task Sub-task
  • Status: Closed Closed
  • Priority: Major Major
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • Affects Version/s: None
  • Fix Version/s: 1.1 M1
  • Component/s: None
  • Labels:
    None
  • Number of attachments :
    1

Activity

Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Hide
Permalink
Edward Kuns added a comment -

One can more flexibly test the generated source code if you can invoke an arbitrary method after the generated source has been compiled. This Jira issue is used to add this feature to the CTF plus one example of its use. This feature is also added to the MarshallingTest test type.

This feature has NOT been added to the generation-only or schema test types, as it doesn't seem very useful for those cases.

Note – the samples that make use of the new feature may or may not work immediately after delivering this code change. Those changes may depend on unrelated changes in my SVN stream that will be delivered ASAP. (That is, fixes to DateTime validation.) If the test

../src/tests/xml/MasterTestSuite/sourcegenerator/Facets/DateTimeNoTimeZone/

fails immediately after I deliver this fix, ignore this failure for now. This failure will be fixed when I deliver the corrections to DateTIme handling and validation, which are trickier than I expected!

Show
Edward Kuns added a comment - One can more flexibly test the generated source code if you can invoke an arbitrary method after the generated source has been compiled. This Jira issue is used to add this feature to the CTF plus one example of its use. This feature is also added to the MarshallingTest test type. This feature has NOT been added to the generation-only or schema test types, as it doesn't seem very useful for those cases. Note – the samples that make use of the new feature may or may not work immediately after delivering this code change. Those changes may depend on unrelated changes in my SVN stream that will be delivered ASAP. (That is, fixes to DateTime validation.) If the test ../src/tests/xml/MasterTestSuite/sourcegenerator/Facets/DateTimeNoTimeZone/ fails immediately after I deliver this fix, ignore this failure for now. This failure will be fixed when I deliver the corrections to DateTIme handling and validation, which are trickier than I expected!
Hide
Permalink
Edward Kuns added a comment -

Attaching a patch for the CTF changes.

Show
Edward Kuns added a comment - Attaching a patch for the CTF changes.
Hide
Permalink
Werner Guttmann added a comment -

Eddie, just looking at the changeset as posted to the SCM list, I wonder whether it would not make sense to see a custom test in addition to e.g. a comparison with a reference document et alias ?

It's that ...

if (_unitTest.getCustomTest() != null) {

that got me thinking, especially as the code in the else block seems to indicate that randomness could be added to the standard test (comparison with a reference document). What do you think ?

Show
Werner Guttmann added a comment - Eddie, just looking at the changeset as posted to the SCM list, I wonder whether it would not make sense to see a custom test in addition to e.g. a comparison with a reference document et alias ? It's that ... if (_unitTest.getCustomTest() != null) { that got me thinking, especially as the code in the else block seems to indicate that randomness could be added to the standard test (comparison with a reference document). What do you think ?
Hide
Permalink
Edward Kuns added a comment -

My original concept was that you would have one unit test for the reference document/random document and additional unit tests for the custom tests. But there's no real reason that it has to be that way. I'll think about this one, but probably I'll make another change so you are not required to create an additional unit test for the custom tests.

Show
Edward Kuns added a comment - My original concept was that you would have one unit test for the reference document/random document and additional unit tests for the custom tests. But there's no real reason that it has to be that way. I'll think about this one, but probably I'll make another change so you are not required to create an additional unit test for the custom tests.
Hide
Permalink
Werner Guttmann added a comment -

Okay, now I understand your approach a bit better .. .

Show
Werner Guttmann added a comment - Okay, now I understand your approach a bit better .. .

People

  • Assignee:
    Edward Kuns
    Reporter:
    Edward Kuns
Vote (0)
Watch (0)

Dates

  • Created:
    Updated:
    Resolved: