You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@beehive.apache.org by Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com> on 2006/07/01 03:34:23 UTC
Netui compiler bvts
I am working on a patch for BEEHIVE-1118 which involves the order that
form validations are performed. The bug looks like it comes down to the way
the pageflow-validation-*.xml file is generated. In addition to the three
testRecorder drts that need to change with this fix I am writing a new
compiler bvt test case.
Currently the compiler bvts only diff the struts-config*.xml files
against expected results. I have a patch to the JUnit class that performs
the file comparisons to make diffing the generated validation files
mandatory (like he struts config files are), however, I wanted to know if
this is the best choice. It would also be easy to modify the test to only
diff the file if an expected result file is present. This would only miss
the case where a validation file is generated unnecessarily. It would
however avoid changing the other compiler bvts that may use Jpf validation
annotations already. Alternatively I could add some sort of flag or
properties file to trigger the diffing of the validation files only when
desired. This choice would be extensible and be easily adjusted to handled
any other generated files.
If this seems like a worthwhile change to the netui compiler bvts I
would like to hear how others think it would be best to handle this. My
initial thought is that it would be best to always diff the pageflow
validation files.
--Andrew
Re: Netui compiler bvts
Posted by Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for looking Carlin, I will look into the issue as well. I was mainly
focused on the order of validation between fields, I did not look into the
order rules are applied for a single field.
On 7/6/06, Carlin Rogers <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> Thanks for the patch. Appreciate the contribution. The fix for
> BEEHIVE-1118
> looks good. There was one minor issue I came across for the diff of the
> generated validation xml files and the expected results. When I run your
> test I get a difference in the ordering of the <msg> elements associated
> to
> a field rule. Looking at the code, the rules are stored in an ArrayList
> and
> we just iterate through them when writing the xml file... so I'm not sure
> yet why there's a difference with your expected result, but can look into
> it.
>
> Carlin
>
> On 7/5/06, Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Carlin, the work went a bit quicker than I had anticipated... I just
> > attached a patch to BEEHIVE-1118 in JIRA that always diffs the
> > pageflow-validation files. It doesn't look like any of the other
> compiler
> > bvts are using validation so no additional tests had to be
> > modified. Please
> > take a look whenever you have a chance.
> >
> > On 7/5/06, Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks Carlin. I will move forward with the intent of always diffing
> > the
> > > pageflow validation config files. With a little luck I should have a
> > patch
> > > by tomorrow for you to review.
> > >
> > > --Andrew
> > >
> > >
> > > On 6/30/06, Carlin Rogers <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for looking at this Andrew! Appreciate your contributions.
> > > >
> > > > My vote would be to always diff the generated page flow validation
> > > > files.
> > > >
> > > > Carlin
> > > >
> > > > On 6/30/06, Andrew McCulloch < amccullo@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I am working on a patch for BEEHIVE-1118 which involves the
> > order
> > > > that
> > > > > form validations are performed. The bug looks like it comes down
> to
> > > > the
> > > > > way
> > > > > the pageflow-validation-*.xml file is generated. In addition to
> the
> > > > three
> > > > > testRecorder drts that need to change with this fix I am writing a
> > new
> > > > > compiler bvt test case.
> > > > >
> > > > > Currently the compiler bvts only diff the struts-config*.xml
> > files
> > > >
> > > > > against expected results. I have a patch to the JUnit class that
> > > > performs
> > > > > the file comparisons to make diffing the generated validation
> files
> > > > > mandatory (like he struts config files are), however, I wanted to
> > know
> > > > if
> > > > > this is the best choice. It would also be easy to modify the test
> > to
> > > > only
> > > > > diff the file if an expected result file is present. This would
> > only
> > > > miss
> > > > > the case where a validation file is generated unnecessarily. It
> > would
> > > >
> > > > > however avoid changing the other compiler bvts that may use Jpf
> > > > validation
> > > > > annotations already. Alternatively I could add some sort of flag
> or
> > > > > properties file to trigger the diffing of the validation files
> only
> > > > when
> > > > > desired. This choice would be extensible and be easily adjusted
> to
> > > > > handled
> > > > > any other generated files.
> > > > >
> > > > > If this seems like a worthwhile change to the netui compiler
> > bvts
> > > > I
> > > > > would like to hear how others think it would be best to handle
> > > > this. My
> > > > > initial thought is that it would be best to always diff the
> pageflow
> > > > > validation files.
> > > > >
> > > > > --Andrew
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: Netui compiler bvts
Posted by Carlin Rogers <ca...@gmail.com>.
Hi Andrew,
Thanks for the patch. Appreciate the contribution. The fix for BEEHIVE-1118
looks good. There was one minor issue I came across for the diff of the
generated validation xml files and the expected results. When I run your
test I get a difference in the ordering of the <msg> elements associated to
a field rule. Looking at the code, the rules are stored in an ArrayList and
we just iterate through them when writing the xml file... so I'm not sure
yet why there's a difference with your expected result, but can look into
it.
Carlin
On 7/5/06, Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Carlin, the work went a bit quicker than I had anticipated... I just
> attached a patch to BEEHIVE-1118 in JIRA that always diffs the
> pageflow-validation files. It doesn't look like any of the other compiler
> bvts are using validation so no additional tests had to be
> modified. Please
> take a look whenever you have a chance.
>
> On 7/5/06, Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks Carlin. I will move forward with the intent of always diffing
> the
> > pageflow validation config files. With a little luck I should have a
> patch
> > by tomorrow for you to review.
> >
> > --Andrew
> >
> >
> > On 6/30/06, Carlin Rogers <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks for looking at this Andrew! Appreciate your contributions.
> > >
> > > My vote would be to always diff the generated page flow validation
> > > files.
> > >
> > > Carlin
> > >
> > > On 6/30/06, Andrew McCulloch < amccullo@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I am working on a patch for BEEHIVE-1118 which involves the
> order
> > > that
> > > > form validations are performed. The bug looks like it comes down to
> > > the
> > > > way
> > > > the pageflow-validation-*.xml file is generated. In addition to the
> > > three
> > > > testRecorder drts that need to change with this fix I am writing a
> new
> > > > compiler bvt test case.
> > > >
> > > > Currently the compiler bvts only diff the struts-config*.xml
> files
> > >
> > > > against expected results. I have a patch to the JUnit class that
> > > performs
> > > > the file comparisons to make diffing the generated validation files
> > > > mandatory (like he struts config files are), however, I wanted to
> know
> > > if
> > > > this is the best choice. It would also be easy to modify the test
> to
> > > only
> > > > diff the file if an expected result file is present. This would
> only
> > > miss
> > > > the case where a validation file is generated unnecessarily. It
> would
> > >
> > > > however avoid changing the other compiler bvts that may use Jpf
> > > validation
> > > > annotations already. Alternatively I could add some sort of flag or
> > > > properties file to trigger the diffing of the validation files only
> > > when
> > > > desired. This choice would be extensible and be easily adjusted to
> > > > handled
> > > > any other generated files.
> > > >
> > > > If this seems like a worthwhile change to the netui compiler
> bvts
> > > I
> > > > would like to hear how others think it would be best to handle
> > > this. My
> > > > initial thought is that it would be best to always diff the pageflow
> > > > validation files.
> > > >
> > > > --Andrew
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
Re: Netui compiler bvts
Posted by Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com>.
Hi Carlin, the work went a bit quicker than I had anticipated... I just
attached a patch to BEEHIVE-1118 in JIRA that always diffs the
pageflow-validation files. It doesn't look like any of the other compiler
bvts are using validation so no additional tests had to be modified. Please
take a look whenever you have a chance.
On 7/5/06, Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks Carlin. I will move forward with the intent of always diffing the
> pageflow validation config files. With a little luck I should have a patch
> by tomorrow for you to review.
>
> --Andrew
>
>
> On 6/30/06, Carlin Rogers <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for looking at this Andrew! Appreciate your contributions.
> >
> > My vote would be to always diff the generated page flow validation
> > files.
> >
> > Carlin
> >
> > On 6/30/06, Andrew McCulloch < amccullo@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am working on a patch for BEEHIVE-1118 which involves the order
> > that
> > > form validations are performed. The bug looks like it comes down to
> > the
> > > way
> > > the pageflow-validation-*.xml file is generated. In addition to the
> > three
> > > testRecorder drts that need to change with this fix I am writing a new
> > > compiler bvt test case.
> > >
> > > Currently the compiler bvts only diff the struts-config*.xml files
> >
> > > against expected results. I have a patch to the JUnit class that
> > performs
> > > the file comparisons to make diffing the generated validation files
> > > mandatory (like he struts config files are), however, I wanted to know
> > if
> > > this is the best choice. It would also be easy to modify the test to
> > only
> > > diff the file if an expected result file is present. This would only
> > miss
> > > the case where a validation file is generated unnecessarily. It would
> >
> > > however avoid changing the other compiler bvts that may use Jpf
> > validation
> > > annotations already. Alternatively I could add some sort of flag or
> > > properties file to trigger the diffing of the validation files only
> > when
> > > desired. This choice would be extensible and be easily adjusted to
> > > handled
> > > any other generated files.
> > >
> > > If this seems like a worthwhile change to the netui compiler bvts
> > I
> > > would like to hear how others think it would be best to handle
> > this. My
> > > initial thought is that it would be best to always diff the pageflow
> > > validation files.
> > >
> > > --Andrew
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: Netui compiler bvts
Posted by Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Carlin. I will move forward with the intent of always diffing the
pageflow validation config files. With a little luck I should have a patch
by tomorrow for you to review.
--Andrew
On 6/30/06, Carlin Rogers <ca...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks for looking at this Andrew! Appreciate your contributions.
>
> My vote would be to always diff the generated page flow validation files.
>
> Carlin
>
> On 6/30/06, Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I am working on a patch for BEEHIVE-1118 which involves the order
> that
> > form validations are performed. The bug looks like it comes down to the
> > way
> > the pageflow-validation-*.xml file is generated. In addition to the
> three
> > testRecorder drts that need to change with this fix I am writing a new
> > compiler bvt test case.
> >
> > Currently the compiler bvts only diff the struts-config*.xml files
> > against expected results. I have a patch to the JUnit class that
> performs
> > the file comparisons to make diffing the generated validation files
> > mandatory (like he struts config files are), however, I wanted to know
> if
> > this is the best choice. It would also be easy to modify the test to
> only
> > diff the file if an expected result file is present. This would only
> miss
> > the case where a validation file is generated unnecessarily. It would
> > however avoid changing the other compiler bvts that may use Jpf
> validation
> > annotations already. Alternatively I could add some sort of flag or
> > properties file to trigger the diffing of the validation files only when
> > desired. This choice would be extensible and be easily adjusted to
> > handled
> > any other generated files.
> >
> > If this seems like a worthwhile change to the netui compiler bvts I
> > would like to hear how others think it would be best to handle this. My
> > initial thought is that it would be best to always diff the pageflow
> > validation files.
> >
> > --Andrew
> >
> >
>
>
Re: Netui compiler bvts
Posted by Carlin Rogers <ca...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for looking at this Andrew! Appreciate your contributions.
My vote would be to always diff the generated page flow validation files.
Carlin
On 6/30/06, Andrew McCulloch <am...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I am working on a patch for BEEHIVE-1118 which involves the order that
> form validations are performed. The bug looks like it comes down to the
> way
> the pageflow-validation-*.xml file is generated. In addition to the three
> testRecorder drts that need to change with this fix I am writing a new
> compiler bvt test case.
>
> Currently the compiler bvts only diff the struts-config*.xml files
> against expected results. I have a patch to the JUnit class that performs
> the file comparisons to make diffing the generated validation files
> mandatory (like he struts config files are), however, I wanted to know if
> this is the best choice. It would also be easy to modify the test to only
> diff the file if an expected result file is present. This would only miss
> the case where a validation file is generated unnecessarily. It would
> however avoid changing the other compiler bvts that may use Jpf validation
> annotations already. Alternatively I could add some sort of flag or
> properties file to trigger the diffing of the validation files only when
> desired. This choice would be extensible and be easily adjusted to
> handled
> any other generated files.
>
> If this seems like a worthwhile change to the netui compiler bvts I
> would like to hear how others think it would be best to handle this. My
> initial thought is that it would be best to always diff the pageflow
> validation files.
>
> --Andrew
>
>