<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Software is too expensive to build cheaply... &#187; junit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://twasink.net/blog/tags/junit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://twasink.net/blog</link>
	<description>Robert's Rambling Ruminations Regarding Reality</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 06:57:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>It&#8217;s a bird, it&#8217;s a plane&#8230; it&#8217;s a super call?</title>
		<link>http://twasink.net/blog/2005/08/its-a-bird-its-a-plane-its-a-super-call/</link>
		<comments>http://twasink.net/blog/2005/08/its-a-bird-its-a-plane-its-a-super-call/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Aug 2005 07:27:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patterns]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twasink.net/wp/?p=156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Martin Fowler wrote about the Call Super smell. This occurs when you are allowed to override a method in a parent class, but you must (as opposed to can) call the parent implementation in your method.

As Martin says, this is a code smell. Why? Because it&#8217;s easy to forget, and if you forget it, you [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://twasink.net/blog/2005/08/its-a-bird-its-a-plane-its-a-super-call/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unnecessary dependencies are at least midly naughty</title>
		<link>http://twasink.net/blog/2005/03/unnecessary-dependencies-are-at-least-midly-naughty/</link>
		<comments>http://twasink.net/blog/2005/03/unnecessary-dependencies-are-at-least-midly-naughty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:17:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anti-pattern]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testng]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twasink.net/wp/?p=123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I really, really, shouldn&#8217;t bite, but&#8230; Cedric is asking about dependent test methods and if they are evil Well, they may not be evil, but they are at least mildly naughty.

There are reasons why JUnit has separate test instances per test method. The major reason is independence; you can (or should be able to) run [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://twasink.net/blog/2005/03/unnecessary-dependencies-are-at-least-midly-naughty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ant 1.6.2 &lt;junitreport&gt; doesn&#8217;t work on Java 1.4.1</title>
		<link>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/ant-162-junitreport-doesnt-work-on-java-141/</link>
		<comments>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/ant-162-junitreport-doesnt-work-on-java-141/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jul 2004 15:31:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twasink.net/wp/?p=60</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Little warning for anyone else who stumbles across this problem: the stylesheet used for &#60;junitreport&#62; in Ant 1.6.2 does not work with Xalan 2.2. Unfortunately, this is the version that&#8217;s bundled inside the rt.jar in Java 1.4.1.

The symptom is that it complains about a ClassNotFoundException for &#8216;redirect&#8217;. The solution is to upgrade to using Xalan [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/ant-162-junitreport-doesnt-work-on-java-141/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ant 1.6.2 is out</title>
		<link>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/ant-162-is-out/</link>
		<comments>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/ant-162-is-out/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:24:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twasink.net/wp/?p=59</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yep, Ant 1.6.2 has been released. And the forkmode option for JUnit is there!. I&#8217;m really happy.

Updated: Time figures for the fork mode option:
forkMode=&#8221;perTest&#8221;: 3 minutes 31 seconds for a standard (non-clean) build
formMode=&#8221;perBatch&#8221;: 1 minute 16 seconds.
So about half the old build (which did do more than just run the unit tests) was taken launching [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/ant-162-is-out/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What I don&#8217;t like about TestNG</title>
		<link>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/what-i-dont-like-about-testng/</link>
		<comments>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/what-i-dont-like-about-testng/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2004 23:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testng]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unit testing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twasink.net/wp/?p=55</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Seeing all the comments today about using annotations to declare test cases reminded me that I never got around to writing about what I didn&#8217;t like about TestNG

I wrote quite a long post a couple of months back about the architecture of JUnit, explaining a lot of the complications. Nothing in that article was particularly [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/what-i-dont-like-about-testng/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does JUnit need annotations?</title>
		<link>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/does-junit-need-annotations/</link>
		<comments>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/does-junit-need-annotations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2004 09:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[annotations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twasink.net/wp/?p=53</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Filippo Diotalevi wrote about a wishlist for a better JUnit and he mentioned Cedric&#8217;s pet idea of using annotations to identify test cases.

I&#8217;ve tossed this idea around a few times, and I&#8217;m still not sure what benefit a developer is going to have from using annotations. See this, for example:
[source='java']
@test
public void testDoSomething() {
&#8230;
}
[/source]
Does the annotation [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/07/does-junit-need-annotations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>JUnit Architecture Redux</title>
		<link>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/04/junit-architecture-redux/</link>
		<comments>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/04/junit-architecture-redux/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dissected]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[testng]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twasink.net/wp/?p=27</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Looks like I&#8217;m talking about another post of Cedric&#8217;s It seems he doesn&#8217;t like JUnit&#8217;s test suites, and decided to write a new tool to solve his problem.

I&#8217;m a regular reader of Cedric&#8217;s blog, and I&#8217;ve been following his periodic posts about JUnit with interest. The more I read, the more I&#8217;m convinced that his [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://twasink.net/blog/2004/04/junit-architecture-redux/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>JUnit and data-driven tests</title>
		<link>http://twasink.net/blog/2003/10/junit-and-data-driven-tests/</link>
		<comments>http://twasink.net/blog/2003/10/junit-and-data-driven-tests/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Java]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data driven tests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[junit]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twasink.net/wp/?p=6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s a technique I sometimes use when I&#8217;m doing test-driven development (which is my preferred coding technique). Let&#8217;s say I&#8217;ve got a bunch of test cases that are all basically the same, but they have slightly different inputs and slightly different outputs. A typical test case might look like this:

[source='java']
public void testSomeTest1() {
  Results [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://twasink.net/blog/2003/10/junit-and-data-driven-tests/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
