Update compiler tests to use JUnit instead of TestNG #566

mabbay · 2025-09-12T17:42:38Z

Update compiler tests to use JUnit instead of TestNG.

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace

Reviewers

Paul Sandoz (@PaulSandoz - Reviewer)
Maurizio Cimadamore (@mcimadamore - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/babylon.git pull/566/head:pull/566
$ git checkout pull/566

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/566
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/babylon.git pull/566/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 566

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 566

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/babylon/pull/566.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

bridgekeeper · 2025-09-12T17:44:20Z

👋 Welcome back mabbay! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into code-reflection will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2025-09-12T17:45:30Z

@mabbay This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

Update compiler tests to use JUnit instead of TestNG

Reviewed-by: psandoz, mcimadamore

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 36 new commits pushed to the code-reflection branch:

0b9a838: Examples Improved - FMA Dialect refactored (Examples Improved - FMA Dialect refactored #570)
3fc82e5: [hat] CUDA backend supported for CUDA < 12 ([hat] CUDA backend supported for CUDA < 12 #576)
d3561b7: Allow hat.java run to pass -DXXXX options when running
... and 33 more: https://git.openjdk.org/babylon/compare/d82b1346811fe9183924d09fae2a2a93e9b53bb7...code-reflection

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the code-reflection branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

mlbridge · 2025-09-12T17:49:31Z

Webrevs

PaulSandoz

One area we need to pay special attention to is the order of arguments of assert methods. junit and testng switch the order actual and expected parameters of such methods.

test/langtools/tools/javac/reflect/quoted/TestCaptureQuoted.java

mcimadamore

Aside from @PaulSandoz comment, PR looks good

mcimadamore · 2025-09-15T12:22:52Z

test/langtools/tools/javac/reflect/TestIRFromAnnotation.java

-            "TestCaptureQuotable.java",         // plain testng test
-            "QuotedSameInstanceTest.java",      // plain testng test
-            "CodeModelSameInstanceTest.java"    // plain testng test
+            "TestLocalCapture.java",            // plain junit test


When looking again at this, it would perhaps be beneficial to put all the IR tests in a separate folder. It seems a bit sad that whenever we add a "plain" test we have to come back and list it here.

The exclusion for SuperTest/LocalClassTest of course make more sense, so it's ok for them to stay.

(for the records, I'm not suggesting we tackle this in this PR -- more noting for "future work")

Actually, "plain" test should be in the runtime tests directory.

Or that :-)

mabbay · 2025-09-15T12:45:03Z

One area we need to pay special attention to is the order of arguments of assert methods. junit and testng switch the order actual and expected parameters of such methods.

Yes. But It won't affect the test result, right ?

mcimadamore · 2025-09-15T13:18:39Z

One area we need to pay special attention to is the order of arguments of assert methods. junit and testng switch the order actual and expected parameters of such methods.

Yes. But It won't affect the test result, right ?

In the case of assertEquals, probably not -- but it might result in confusing error messages. You might try to provoke a failure and compare before/after?

PaulSandoz · 2025-09-17T17:58:32Z

test/langtools/tools/javac/reflect/TestLocalCapture.java

+import org.junit.jupiter.params.provider.MethodSource;

-import static org.testng.Assert.*;
+import java.util.stream.IntStream;


Suggestion: use IntelliJ to reorder your imports.

PaulSandoz · 2025-09-17T17:58:51Z

test/langtools/tools/javac/reflect/TestLocalCapture.java

-                .mapToObj(i -> new Object[] { i })
-                .toArray(Object[][]::new);
+    public static IntStream ints() {
+        return IntStream.range(0, 50);


mabbay · 2025-09-22T21:56:28Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2025-09-22T21:58:21Z

Going to push as commit 37ab07b.
Since your change was applied there have been 36 commits pushed to the code-reflection branch:

0b9a838: Examples Improved - FMA Dialect refactored (Examples Improved - FMA Dialect refactored #570)
3fc82e5: [hat] CUDA backend supported for CUDA < 12 ([hat] CUDA backend supported for CUDA < 12 #576)
d3561b7: Allow hat.java run to pass -DXXXX options when running
... and 33 more: https://git.openjdk.org/babylon/compare/d82b1346811fe9183924d09fae2a2a93e9b53bb7...code-reflection

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2025-09-22T21:58:35Z

@mabbay Pushed as commit 37ab07b.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

Use junit instead of testng

8870bed

mabbay requested review from PaulSandoz and mcimadamore September 12, 2025 17:42

mabbay self-assigned this Sep 12, 2025

openjdk bot added ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Sep 12, 2025

PaulSandoz reviewed Sep 12, 2025

View reviewed changes

test/langtools/tools/javac/reflect/quoted/TestCaptureQuoted.java Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

mcimadamore approved these changes Sep 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

mcimadamore reviewed Sep 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

mabbay added 2 commits September 15, 2025 15:30

Make JUnit method-source return IntStream

9ae3967

Swap arguments of assertEquals to match JUnit spec.

33c4fcd

mabbay changed the title ~~Use JUnit instead of TestNG~~ Update compiler tests to use JUnit instead of TestNG Sep 15, 2025

PaulSandoz approved these changes Sep 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

mcimadamore approved these changes Sep 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Sep 22, 2025

openjdk bot closed this Sep 22, 2025

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Sep 22, 2025

Update compiler tests to use JUnit instead of TestNG #566

Update compiler tests to use JUnit instead of TestNG #566

Uh oh!

Conversation

mabbay commented Sep 12, 2025 • edited by openjdk bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Progress

Reviewers

Reviewing

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 12, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Sep 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Sep 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Webrevs

Uh oh!

PaulSandoz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mcimadamore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mcimadamore Sep 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mcimadamore Sep 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mabbay Sep 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mcimadamore Sep 15, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mabbay commented Sep 15, 2025

Uh oh!

mcimadamore commented Sep 15, 2025

Uh oh!

PaulSandoz Sep 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

PaulSandoz Sep 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mabbay commented Sep 22, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Sep 22, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Sep 22, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mabbay commented Sep 12, 2025 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

openjdk bot commented Sep 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Sep 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading