Re: [aspectj-users] LTW fail hard/fast options (for testing)

[Brett Randall <javabrett@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Andy, your comments are spot-on.

I did end up implementing a local IMessageHandler so I could throw
something like an AssertionError.  It didn't give me exactly what I
was after, but it does improve the visibility of the test failure.

The main issue is a combination of the LTW timing issue you allude to,
as well as the way JUnit works. At the time the classes are
loaded/weaved, there are of course no actual tests executing, it's
before that time.  So it's not a simple matter of throwing an
exception - in fact, JUnit seemed happy to continue to launch the test
suite even when an unchecked exception was thrown.  Of course the
custom IMessageHandler can easily store high-priority weaver messages
and then we can make an assertion on it in test(s).

Thanks
Brett

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Andy Clement <andrew.clement@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Right now perhaps the option you have here is -XmessageHandlerClass
> which is supplied the classname of a type implementing IMessageHandler
> - so you can then do what you want for any message that comes out.  I
> guess you could use the type name of the THROW class if you wish,
> likely to be something like "org.aspectj.bridge.IMessageHandler$1" (as
> a workaround for it being non 'top-level' at the moment).
>
> I think I raised a bugzilla already for another approach I was
> thinking of, where you annotated the advice/pointcut with expectations
> (I expect it to match X number of times) and errors will be thrown if
> the expectation isn't met.  This is more straightforward with compile
> time weaving though as you know when that has finished - it isn't so
> obvious in LTW when it has reached the point where the expectation
> should have been met. (there may still be more types to be loaded).
>
> cheers,
> Andy
>
> On 22 October 2011 20:54, Brett Randall <javabrett@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> When unit testing aspects and advised test/tested code (as opposed to
>> deploy/runtime, where this option wouldn't make sense), it would be
>> nice to be able to instruct the weaver to throw some sort of unchecked
>> Exception or Error if there are configuration problems with error
>> severity or higher.  Does such an option exist - I couldn't see it in
>> the LTW weaver options?
>>
>> This would allow unit tests to fail-fast in the case of a LTW
>> configuration error, and could help clarify the cause of the failure.
>> Some pre-existing unit tests I'm currently working with picked up some
>> weaving issues during development e.g. a typo in a pointcut, and the
>> program continues to execute, and to establish the cause of the unit
>> test fail you need to read the weaver verbose console messages to find
>> the problem, whereas an exception would be clearer.
>>
>> Has anything like this ever been considered - would it be feasible and
>> worthwhile?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Brett
>> _______________________________________________
>> aspectj-users mailing list
>> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>>
> _______________________________________________
> aspectj-users mailing list
> aspectj-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/aspectj-users
>