Bugfix/launcher preconditions check #5281
Open
+145
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…lementations Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
… to v0.28.0 (junit-team#5269) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
…unit-team#5267) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
- Add a dedicated 'Kotlin Coroutines' section to the user guide - Move existing suspend function documentation for context - Recommend runTest over runBlocking for coroutine-based tests - Update documentation demo to use runTest Resolves junit-team#4768. --------- Signed-off-by: cloud <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Marc Philipp <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
…che" This reverts commit 0c8e4d4. Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
Adopts the `SystemPropertyExtension`[1] from JUnit Pioneer into JUnit
Jupiter. While this is a faithful port some notable changes have been
made. With that in mind the API status has been set to experimental.
### `@RestoreSystemProperties` uses `Properties::clone`
When using `@RestoreSystemProperties` JUnit Pioneer would create a copy
of the effective properties in the object. This would include any
defaults as if they were regular values. I.e:
```java
static Properties createEffectiveClone(Properties original) {
Properties clone = new Properties();
// This implementation is used because:
// System.getProperties() returns the actual Properties object, not a copy.
// Clone doesn't include nested defaults, but propertyNames() does.
original.propertyNames().asIterator().forEachRemaining(k -> {
String v = original.getProperty(k.toString());
if (v != null) {
// v will be null if the actual value was an object
clone.put(k, original.getProperty(k.toString()));
}
});
return clone;
}
```
JUnit instead uses `Properties::clone` and performs a best effort
attempt to detect default properties and fail if any were detected. For
classes that extend `Properties` it is assumed that `clone` is
implemented with sufficient fidelity. I.e:
```java
static Properties cloneWithoutDefaults(ExtensionContext context, Properties properties) {
// Custom implementations have to implement clone correctly.
if (properties.getClass() == Properties.class) {
throwIfHasObservableDefaults(context, properties);
}
return (Properties) properties.clone();
}
```
We do this because:
1. System properties are to the best of our knowledge created without
defaults. Nor are we aware of a good usecase for defaults. If you do
have a use case for this, please do create a new issue to explain it.
2. Using `Properties::clone` provides a contract that is easier to
document and understand. It also allows subclasses of `Properties` to be
provided to tests. For example, a variant that does include defaults
when cloned.
### Restore "compromised" entries
While strongly discouraged non-string values can be added to a
properties object. The Pioneer implementation would not restore these
"compromised" values. This has been fixed in the JUnit implementation.
Closes: junit-team#4726
1. https://github.com/junit-pioneer/junit-pioneer/blob/062ce51296dab909119fd6c9f090b9d6a2982530/src/main/java/org/junitpioneer/jupiter/SystemPropertyExtension.java
Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: mehulimukherjee <[email protected]>
mehulimukherjee
force-pushed
the
bugfix/launcher-preconditions-check
branch
from
ef18e65 to
dffed09
Compare
✅ All tests passed ✅🏷️ Commit: 4d00857 Learn more about TestLens at testlens.app. |
2 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I hereby agree to the terms of the JUnit Contributor License Agreement.
Definition of Done
@APIannotations