Re: XML config

Shash Chatterjee wrote:

>>I think some of the tests might be a little bit weak, for example:
>>
>>It is not actually testing whether the parsed pointcut is an and-
>>pointcut or not...
>>
>>    
>>
>
>True. It is testing only whether there is a pointcut at all (in other words,
>if the parsing failed, it would not have created a pointcut).  The only reason
>I didn't test for an and pointcut is because (except for And), all the other
>pointcuts are marked private.  MethodAttribute and And are public, but in the
>minority.  If those could be changed to public then it is a simple test. 
>However, I didn't not know the reason for making them public/private one way
>or another, hence left them alone.
>  
>

Yeah, let's make them public.

>>It could also have a better name, like:
>>testParsesInterceptorWithNestedAndPointcut
>>
>>    
>>
>Agreed if you don't mind long names (I prefer long names).
>  
>

I *love* long names!
Have you seen TestDox?
http://agiledox.sourceforge.net/