JUnit test



  • I just found this while trying to fix some JUnit tests that are causing our build to fail. It seems like an expensive way to do: int n = concreteClass.getSomeField();

     

    public abstract class Abstract {
    private int someField;
    public int getSomeField() { return someField; }
    // unrelated abstract stuff
    }

    public class Concrete extends Abstract {
    // implement abstract stuff here
    }

    class TestConcrete extends TestCase {
    public void testXXX() {
    Concrete concreteClass = new Concrete();
    try {
    Field f = Abstract.class.getDeclaredField("someField");
    f.setAccessible(true);
    int n = f.getInt(concreteClass);
    } catch (Exception e) {
    fail(e.getMessage());
    }
    }
    }



  • If you just call the function, you can't be sure that the field was actually set correctly.  Duuuuuuuh.



  • @snoofle said:

    I just found this while trying to fix some JUnit tests that are causing our build to fail. It seems like an expensive way to do: int n = concreteClass.getSomeField();

     

    public abstract class Abstract {
    private int someField;
    public int getSomeField() { return someField; }
    // unrelated abstract stuff
    }

    public class Concrete extends Abstract {
    // implement abstract stuff here
    }

    class TestConcrete extends TestCase {
    public void testXXX() {
    Concrete concreteClass = new Concrete();
    try {
    Field f = Abstract.class.getDeclaredField("someField");
    f.setAccessible(true);
    int n = f.getInt(concreteClass);
    } catch (Exception e) {
    fail(e.getMessage());
    }
    }
    }

    Accessing a field directly is always faster than calling a method to retrieve that field's value... except when accessing said field via reflection. Also, what's with declaring a ConcreteClass, surely the author should've declared avariable of type AbstractClass and assigned an instance of ConcreteClass to it?



  • @The_Assimilator said:

    Accessing a field directly is always faster than calling a method to retrieve that field's value

    Except when it doesn't.  Like using a simple C# property.



  • @Sutherlands said:

    Except when it doesn't.  Like using a simple C# property.

    Yeah, using even the simplest of C# properties in Java has HUGE performance implications.



  • @Chewbacca said:

    @Sutherlands said:
    Except when it doesn't.  Like using a simple C# property.
    Yeah, using even the simplest of C# properties in Java has HUGE performance implications.
    You're bad with examples, aren't you?  Java will also inline simple getters/setters.



  • @Sutherlands said:

    @Chewbacca said:
    @Sutherlands said:
    Except when it doesn't.  Like using a simple C# property.

    Yeah, using even the simplest of C# properties in Java has HUGE performance implications.

    You're bad with examples, aren't you?  Java will also inline simple getters/setters.

    He's still right.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.