-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 479
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
8339513: [TestBug] Convert fxml tests to JUnit 5 #1564
8339513: [TestBug] Convert fxml tests to JUnit 5 #1564
Conversation
👋 Welcome back aghaisas! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
@aghaisas This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details. After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:
You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed. At the time when this comment was updated there had been 2 new commits pushed to the
Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the ➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the |
Webrevs
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
All looks good. I presume you verified that there are no assertXxxx
calls with a message string? I didn't see any, and the GHA build is green.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I might suggest fixing the formatting for readability.
This is minor, will re-approve if you decide to fix it.
modules/javafx.fxml/src/test/java/test/javafx/fxml/RT_19008Test.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
modules/javafx.fxml/src/test/java/test/javafx/fxml/RT_19329Test.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
modules/javafx.fxml/src/test/java/test/javafx/fxml/RT_25494_Cycle_DetectionTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good to me too, just some formatting is off (as Andy also noticed)
modules/javafx.fxml/src/test/java/test/javafx/fxml/RT_26449Test.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
modules/javafx.fxml/src/test/java/test/javafx/fxml/RT_25494_Cycle_DetectionTest.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
modules/javafx.fxml/src/test/java/test/javafx/fxml/RT_18933Test.java
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Yes. There are no |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thank you
@kevinrushforth : assertXXX with strings will most certainly fail during the GHA run, unless the message is exactly the same as the expected or observed parameter, in which case it is probably ok... |
Indeed, that is what would almost certainly happen. There is a (completely contrived) case where it will render the assert useless. If the message string is identical to the "expected" string (in which case, why would you bother with a message string), like this:
then changing the above case to a JUnit 5 |
/integrate |
This converts FXML module tests to junit5.
All changes are trivial API replacements from junit4 to junit5.
There are no parameterized tests in this module.
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jfx.git pull/1564/head:pull/1564
$ git checkout pull/1564
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/1564
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jfx.git pull/1564/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 1564
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 1564
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1564.diff
Webrev
Link to Webrev Comment