Skip to content

+tck explains createElement in more useful terms #250

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 27, 2015

Conversation

ktoso
Copy link
Contributor

@ktoso ktoso commented Mar 25, 2015

resolves #231

@@ -243,11 +243,17 @@ Subscriber rules Verification is split up into two files (styles) of tests.

The Blackbox Verification tests do not require the implementation under test to be modified at all, yet they are *not* able to verify most rules. In Whitebox Verification, more control over `request()` calls etc. is required in order to validate rules more precisely.

It is highly recommended to implement the `SubscriberBlackboxVerification<T>` instead of the blackbox one even if it is more troublesome to do so, as it can test far more corner cases in implementations that would otherwise be left untested (if only blackbox tests would be used).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems odd to recommend the blackbox instead of... the blackbox...

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I suspect the correct word is "work" rather than "troublesome".

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  1. thanks!
  2. "if it is more troublesome to do so" sounds valid to me, but I'll reword/simplify :)

@ktoso
Copy link
Contributor Author

ktoso commented Mar 25, 2015

Thanks for the review, pushed fixups. // @viktorklang

@ktoso
Copy link
Contributor Author

ktoso commented Mar 25, 2015

// Note to self, editing anything that needs attention in the github edit+pr window is a bad idea ;)

@viktorklang
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM!

@reactive-streams/contributors This is a TCK documentation update addressing a question from @purplefox, merging this in 24h unless someone complains (so we can get RC4 out tomorrow).

@viktorklang
Copy link
Contributor

@reactive-streams/contributors Merging without objection

viktorklang added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 27, 2015
+tck explains createElement in more useful terms
@viktorklang viktorklang merged commit 78c1dd4 into reactive-streams:master Mar 27, 2015
@viktorklang viktorklang deleted the patch-1 branch March 27, 2015 11:13
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Clarification on SubscriberBlackboxVerification.createElement
2 participants