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 <
[hidden email]> 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.
> 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
Locked
