On 23 April 2018 at 00:48, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com> wrote:

No idea. May be people were thinking that printOn: were not worth tests.
Now I would like to revisit some unused features of Sunit such as the history.

On Sun, Apr 22, 2018 at 3:44 AM, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:
> I bumped into ClassTestCase for the first time, with class comment...
> "This class is intended for unit tests of individual classes and their
> metaclasses.
> It provides methods to determine the coverage of the unit tests.
>
> Subclasses are expected to re-implement:
>�� #classesToBeTested and
>�� #selectorsToBeIgnored

btw, I see in Pharo6.1 that most implementors of��#selectorsToBeIgnored are circa 2003

authored by "brb".�� Note it was useful to be able to see this info in "Versions"

which is currently not available in Pharo 7.

cheers -ben

��

> They should also implement to confirm that all methods have been tested.
>�� #testCoverage
>�� super testCoverage.
> "
>
> A few questions to improve my knowledge of how to use this...
>
>�� a. there are no implementors of #classesToBeTested but several of
> #classToBeTested. I presume the class comment is wrong?
>
>�� b. there are no implementors of #testCoverage, so I presume I can ignore
> that? (and I've no example to work from)
>
>�� c. ClassTestCase is subclassed 73 times, but #selectorsToBeIgnored is only
> implemented 9 times.�� So this seems not critical? But btw, every of those at
> least ignores #printOn:.�� I'm curious why?�� These are tagged "private", but
> is that a good reason not to test it?
>
> My purpose was to add a new class MagnitudeTest for a new
> new method to Magnitude in response to the recent #min:max: discussion.
>
> cheers -ben