2017 bis heute 2016 2015 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 2010 2009 | 2008 | 2007

(ältere Archiveinträge vor 2007 nicht dargestellt, aber in der Suche enthalten)

Mailingliste - Einträge 2008


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [QF-Test] Searching for Tips using Dependencies for Starting/Stopping SUT


  • Subject: Re: [QF-Test] Searching for Tips using Dependencies for Starting/Stopping SUT
  • From: "Michaelis, Mark" <mark.michaelis@?.com>
  • Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:46:43 +0200

Hello Greg,

well, for me it was a clear error that it was undefined. And I still don't know why. At least if I set a default value it should not be "undefined". From my point of view I would like to have a warning in the log (even the compressed one) if there is an undefined variable.

Just my 2 Euro-Cents,
Mark

--
Mark Michaelis
Software Engineer Quality Assurance
tel +49.40.325587.545
fax +49.40.325587.999
CoreMedia
Ludwig-Erhard-Str. 18
20459 Hamburg, Germany
www.coremedia.com
--------------------------------------------------------
CoreMedia AG
Executive Board: Sören Stamer (CEO), Dr. Klemens Kleiminger (CFO)
Supervisory Board: Prof. Dr. Florian Matthes (Chairman)
Trade Register: Amtsgericht Hamburg, HR B 76277
--------------------------------------------------------

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Gregor Schmid [mailto:Gregor.Schmid@?.de]
Gesendet: Freitag, 10. Oktober 2008 17:08
An: qftest-list@?.de
Cc: Michaelis, Mark
Betreff: Re: [QF-Test] Searching for Tips using Dependencies for Starting/Stopping SUT


Hello Mark,

"Michaelis, Mark" <mark.michaelis@?.com> writes:

> Hello Greg,
>
> thanks for your hint. Switching off compressed reports I finally
> found the root cause: One of the characteristic variables was
> undefined on first call and defined on second call although I set a
> default value at the dependency. Now I set the default value at test
> suite level and I am fine.

Ah, yes, glad you found it. I've stumbled across this occasionally and
am still trying to make up my mind, whether it would be better to
simply ignore UNDEFINED characteristic variables when comparing
dependencies on the dependency stack. After all, leaving such a
variable undefined is a bit like saying "I don't care about its
value".

Thoughts anybody?

Best regards,
    Greg