You can find an XSD based on the code in Apache Ant 1.8.2 at https://github.com/windyroad/JUnit-Schema

The xml output is not generated by JUnit (at least, not the junit.jar), but by the junit ant task.&lt;br/&gt;
The relevant class is &lt;a href=&quot;http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/ant/core/trunk/src/main/org/apache/tools/ant/taskdefs/optional/junit/XMLJUnitResultFormatter.java&quot;&gt;org.apache.tools.ant.taskdefs.optional.junit.XMLJUnitResultFormatter&lt;/a&gt;.

I found some informal spec at http://ant.1045680.n5.nabble.com/schema-for-junit-xml-output-td1375274.html

As others have mentioned the xml is handled by ANT not jUnit

[Here][1]&#39;s the best spec I&#39;ve seen. From [this][2] post


  [1]: http://junitpdfreport.sourceforge.net/managedcontent/PdfTranslation
  [2]: http://www.junit.org/node/399

I can only give you an general information.

In the [sourcecode of JUnit][1], you will find your information.
If you provide some more information, I can help you further. My personal hint for finding your specification would be `junit.framework.TestResult`.

Good luck!

  [1]: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=15278&amp;package_id=12472

Why are we using 

    for (int i = 0 ; i &lt; count ; i++){ }

Why the `i`?

Why not 

    for (int a = 0; a &lt; count; a++){ }

I do it, you do it, everyone does it, but WHY?

*Edit

I found out an old saying about Fortran which is more funny than correct which says &quot;god is real, everything else above is an integer&quot;.

&quot;god&quot; would be a variable name stating with a `g` so it would be in the real domain, while everything else above (excluding h for the joke&#39;s purpose) would be an integer.

It seems that the original saying was in fact: &quot;God is real, unless declared integer&quot;. Apologies to everyone citing me in their Ph.D thesis.


Why are we using i as a counter in loops?

I am a hobbyist programmer (started with VBA to make excel quicker) and have been working with VB.NET / C#.NET and am trying to learn ADO.NET.

A facet of programming that has always frustrated me is what does &#39;good&#39; look like? I am not a professional so have little to compare against. What makes a better programmer? 
Is it:

  - They have a better understanding of
    all the objects / classes / methods
    in a given language?
  - Their programs are more efficient?
  - The design of their programs are much
    better in terms of better
    documentation, good choice of names
    for functions etc.?

Put another way, if I were to look at the code of a professional programmer, what is the first thing that I would notice about their code relative to mine? For example, I read books like &#39;Professional ASP.NET&#39; by Wrox press. Are the code examples in that book &#39;world class&#39;? Is that the pinnacle? Would any top-gun programmer look at that code and think it was good code?


What does a good programmer&#39;s code look like?

Where can I find the specification of JUnit&#39;s XML output.
My goal is to write a UnitTest++ XML reporter which produced JUnit like output.

See: &quot;[Unable to get hudson to parse JUnit test output XML][1]&quot; and &quot;[https://stackoverflow.com/questions/411218/hudson-c-and-unittest][2]&quot;


  [1]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/428553/unable-to-get-hudson-to-parse-junit-test-output-xml
  [2]: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/411218/hudson-c-and-unittest

Spec. for JUnit XML Output

<p>Where can I find the specification of JUnit's XML output.
My goal is to write a UnitTest++ XML reporter which produced JUnit like output.</p>
<p>See: "<a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/428553/unable-to-get-hudson-to-parse-junit-test-output-xml" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Unable to get hudson to parse JUnit test output XML</a>" and "<a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/411218/hudson-c-and-unittest" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">https://stackoverflow.com/questions/411218/hudson-c-and-unittest</a>"</p>


I realise that it&#39;s not elegant or desired, but is it allowed (in well-formed XML) for an attribute value in an XML element to span multiple lines?

e.g.

    &lt;some-xml-element value=&quot;this value goes over....
    multiple lines!&quot; /&gt;

Yeah I realise there&#39;s better ways of writing that. I would personally write it like:

    &lt;some-xml-element&gt;
    &lt;value&gt;this value goes over...
    multiple lines!&lt;/value&gt;
    &lt;/some-xml-element&gt;

or:

    &lt;some-xml-element value=&quot;this value goes over....&amp;#13;&amp;#10;&quot; /&gt;

But we have our own XML parser and I&#39;d like to know whether the first example is allowed in well-formed XML.

Are line breaks in XML attribute values allowed?

What I want to achieve is very simple: I have a Windows Forms (.NET 3.5) application that uses a path for reading information. This path can be modified by the user, by using the options form I provide.

Now, I want to save the path value to a file for later use. This would be one of the many settings saved to this file. This file would sit directly in the application folder.

I understand three options are available:

 - ConfigurationSettings file (appname.exe.config)
 - Registry
 - Custom XML file

I read that the .NET configuration file is not foreseen for saving values back to it. As for the registry, I would like to get as far away from it as possible.

Does this mean that I should use a custom XML file to save configuration settings?

If so, I would like to see code example of that (C#).

I have seen other discussions on this subject, but it is still not clear to me.



How can I save application settings in a Windows Forms application?

I&#39;ve frequently seen a space preceding the closing slash in XML and HTML tags. The XHTML line break is probably the canonical example:

    &lt;br /&gt;

instead of:

    &lt;br/&gt;

The space seems superfluous. In fact, I think that it is superfluous.

**What is the reason for writing this space?**

I&#39;ve read that the space solves some &quot;backwards compatibility issues.&quot; Which backwards compatibility issues? Are those issues still relevant, or are we still adding extra spaces for the sake of, say, IE3 compatibility? Does there exist some spec with the definitive answer on this?

If not backwards compatibility, then is it a readability issue? Similar to the Great Open Curly Brace debate?

    void it_goes_up_here() {

    int no_you_fool_it_goes_down_there()
    {

I can certainly respect differing stylistic opinions, so I&#39;ll be happy to learn that writing the space is simply a matter of taste.

Space Before Closing Slash?

I have an xml and it has nodes with i:nil=&quot;true&quot; in it.  What does that mean?

For example:

    &lt;FirstName i:nil=&quot;true&quot; /&gt;

Does that mean something different than:

    &lt;FirstName /&gt;

If so, what is the difference?

What does i:nil=&quot;true&quot; mean?

&gt; **Possible Duplicate:**  
&gt; [Converting XML to JSON using Python?](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/191536/converting-xml-to-json-using-python)  

&lt;!-- End of automatically inserted text --&gt;

I&#39;m doing some work on App Engine and I need to convert an XML document being retrieved from a remote server into an equivalent JSON object.

I&#39;m using `xml.dom.minidom` to parse the XML data being returned by `urlfetch`. I&#39;m also trying to use `django.utils.simplejson` to convert the parsed XML document into JSON. I&#39;m completely at a loss as to how to hook the two together. Below is the code I&#39;m tinkering with:

	from xml.dom import minidom
	from django.utils import simplejson as json

	#pseudo code that returns actual xml data as a string from remote server. 
	result = urlfetch.fetch(url,&#39;&#39;,&#39;get&#39;);

	dom = minidom.parseString(result.content)
	json = simplejson.load(dom)

	self.response.out.write(json)



How to convert XML to JSON in Python?

So, carrying on with my new years resolution to get more in to TDD, I am now starting to work more with [Rhino Mocks][1].

One thing I am keen to do is to make sure I really grok what I am getting into, so I wanted to check my understanding of what I have seen so far (and I thought it would be good to get it up here as a resource).

## What is a &quot;Stub&quot;?

[1]:http://ayende.com/projects/rhino-mocks.aspx

What is a &quot;Stub&quot;?

In JUnit 3, I could get the name of the currently running test like this:

    public class MyTest extends TestCase
    {
        public void testSomething()
        {
            System.out.println(&quot;Current test is &quot; + getName());
            ...
        }
    }

which would print &quot;Current test is testSomething&quot;. 

Is there any out-of-the-box or simple way to do this in JUnit 4?

Background: Obviously, I don&#39;t want to just print the name of the test. I want to load test-specific data that is stored in a resource with the same name as the test. You know, [convention over configuration][1] and all that.

  [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_over_Configuration

Get name of currently executing test in JUnit 4

This question is more or less programming language agnostic. However as I&#39;m mostly into Java these days that&#39;s where I&#39;ll draw my examples from. I&#39;m also thinking about the OOP case, so if you want to test a method you need an instance of that methods class.

A *core rule* for **[unit tests][1]** is that they should be autonomous, and that can be achieved by isolating a class from its dependencies. There are several ways to do it and it depends on if you inject your dependencies using [IoC][2] (in the Java world we have Spring, EJB3 and other frameworks/platforms which provide injection capabilities) and/or if you mock objects (for Java you have [JMock][3] and [EasyMock][4]) to separate a class being tested from its dependencies.

If we need to test groups of methods in different classes* and see that they are well integration, we write **[integration tests][5]**. And here is my question!

 - At least in web applications, state is often persisted to a database. We could use the same tools as for unit tests to achieve independence from the database. But in my humble opinion I think that there are cases when not using a database for integration tests is mocking too much (but feel free to disagree; not using a database at all, ever, is also a valid answer as it makes the question irrelevant).
 - **When you use a database for integration tests, how do you fill that database with data?** I can see two approaches:
  - Store the database contents for the integration test and load it before starting the test. If it&#39;s stored as an SQL dump, a database file, XML or something else would be interesting to know.
  - Create the necessary database structures by API calls. These calls are probably split up into several methods in your test code and each of these methods *may* fail. It could be seen as your integration test having dependencies on other tests.

How are you making certain that database data needed for tests is there when you need it? And why did you choose the method you choose?

**Please provide an answer with a motivation**, as it&#39;s in the motivation the interesting part lies. Remember that just saying &quot;It&#39;s best practice!&quot; isn&#39;t a *real* motivation, it&#39;s just re-iterating something you&#39;ve read or heard from someone. For that case please explain *why* it&#39;s best practice.

*I&#39;m including one method calling other methods in (the same or other) instances of the same class in my definition of unit test, even though it might technically not be correct. Feel free to correct me, but let&#39;s keep it as a side issue.

  [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_testing
  [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inversion_of_control
  [3]: http://www.jmock.org/
  [4]: http://www.easymock.org/
  [5]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integration_testing

Database data needed in integration tests; created by API calls or using imported data?

I&#39;ve just started playing with Guice, and a use-case I can think of is that in a test I just want to override a single binding.  I think I&#39;d like to use the rest of the production level bindings to ensure everything is setup correctly and to avoid duplication.

So imagine I have the following Module

    public class ProductionModule implements Module {
        public void configure(Binder binder) {
	        binder.bind(InterfaceA.class).to(ConcreteA.class);
	        binder.bind(InterfaceB.class).to(ConcreteB.class);
	        binder.bind(InterfaceC.class).to(ConcreteC.class);
        }
    }

And in my test I only want to override InterfaceC, while keeping InterfaceA and InterfaceB in tact, so I&#39;d want something like:

    Module testModule = new Module() {
        public void configure(Binder binder) {
            binder.bind(InterfaceC.class).to(MockC.class);
        }
    };
    Guice.createInjector(new ProductionModule(), testModule);

I&#39;ve also tried the following, with no luck:

    Module testModule = new ProductionModule() {
        public void configure(Binder binder) {
            super.configure(binder);
            binder.bind(InterfaceC.class).to(MockC.class);
        }
    };
    Guice.createInjector(testModule);

Does anyone know if it&#39;s possible to do what I want or am I completely barking up the wrong tree??

--- Follow up:
It would seem I can achieve what I want if I make use of the @ImplementedBy tag on the interface and then just provide a binding in the test case, which works nicely when there is a 1-1 mapping between the interface and implementation.

Also, after discussing this with a colleague it would seem we&#39;d head down the road of overriding an entire module and ensuring we have our modules defined correctly.  This seems like it might cause a problem though where a binding is misplaced in a module and needs to be moved, thus possibly breaking a load of tests as bindings may no longer be available to be overriden.

Overriding Binding in Guice

I&#39;m new to TDD, and I find RegExp quite a particular case. Is there any special way to unit test them, or may I just treat them as regular functions?

How do you unit test regular expressions?

How do I create test suites with JUnit 4?

All the documentation I&#39;ve seen doesn&#39;t seem to be working for me. And if I use the Eclipse wizard it doesn&#39;t give me an option to select any of the test classes I have created.

JUnit 4 Test Suites

I have a base class for many tests that has some helper methods they all need.

It does not by itself have any tests on it, but JUnit (in eclipse) is invoking the test runner on it and complaining that there are no methods to test.

How can I make it ignore this class?

I know I could add a `dummyTest` method that would solve the problem, but it would also appear for all the children classes.

Suggestions?

How to get Junit 4 to ignore a Base Test Class?

I am comparing text files in junit using:

    public static void assertReaders(BufferedReader expected,
              BufferedReader actual) throws IOException {
        String line;
        while ((line = expected.readLine()) != null) {
            assertEquals(line, actual.readLine());
        }
    
        assertNull(&quot;Actual had more lines then the expected.&quot;, actual.readLine());
        assertNull(&quot;Expected had more lines then the actual.&quot;, expected.readLine());
    }

Is this a good way to compare text files?  What is preferred?


Comparing text files with Junit

Should I initialize class fields at declaration like this?

    public class SomeTest extends TestCase
    {
        private final List list = new ArrayList();
    
        public void testPopulateList()
        {
            // Add stuff to the list
            // Assert the list contains what I expect
        }
    }

Or in setUp() like this?

    public class SomeTest extends TestCase
    {
        private List list;
    
        @Override
        protected void setUp() throws Exception
        {
            super.setUp();
            this.list = new ArrayList();
        }
    
        public void testPopulateList()
        {
            // Add stuff to the list
            // Assert the list contains what I expect
        }
    }

I tend to use the first form because it&#39;s more concise, and allows me to use final fields.  If I don&#39;t *need* to use the setUp() method for set-up, should I still use it, and why?

**Clarification:**
JUnit will instantiate the test class once per test method.  That means `list` will be created once per test, regardless of where I declare it.  It also means there are no temporal dependencies between the tests.  So it seems like there are no advantages to using setUp().  However the JUnit FAQ has many examples that initialize an empty collection in setUp(), so I figure there must be a reason.

Content Type	Original Author	Original Content on Stackoverflow
Question	Gilad Naor	View Question on Stackoverflow
Solution 1 - Xml	Tom Howard	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 2 - Xml	Laurent Doré	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 3 - Xml	HD.	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 4 - Xml	case nelson	View Answer on Stackoverflow
Solution 5 - Xml	guerda	View Answer on Stackoverflow

Spec. for JUnit XML Output

Xml Problem Overview

Xml Solutions

Solution 1 - Xml

Solution 2 - Xml

Solution 3 - Xml

Solution 4 - Xml

Solution 5 - Xml

What does a good programmer's code look like?

Why are we using i as a counter in loops?

Attributions