comments on use case #2, and on termination of test case

[Jacques Durand <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>]

Title: comments on use case #2, and on termination of test case

Mike:

I think we need to tighten the semantics of a Test Assertion failing without explicit exit statement:
I am concerned that these implicit rules we have will be confusing on complex test cases that have concurrent threads...

(see my comment in 1.1.4, attached)
I would suggest we consider the following proposal:
- no "fail" outcome is produced unless an explicit fail exit statement is met during exec.
- no "pass" outcome unless an explicit pass exit statement is met during exec.
- a failed assertion without explicit exit statement, by default will "abort" the thread, but just the thread.
- a passed assertion without explicit exit statement, by default will "continue" the thread.
- when threads are joined, an aborted thread will automatically cause failure of an and-join (which aborts the container thread). In case it is an or-join, the aborted thread will just be ignored by the or-join (the or-join will fail if all joined threads abort). If a thread that was split but never joined, aborts, then it just stops and is simply ignored for the rest of the test case exec and outcome.

- if the Main thread of a test case aborts, the outcome is "Undetermined" by default (this is the only case of implicit outcome, in addition to other explicit "Undetermined" outcomes)

Some additional Comments starting p.5 of the attached doc (mostly, use case #2).

Also, I was searching for the section where we specify the test step timeout (MaxDuration?) , in the draft spec,
and did not find it (same for the "sleep" statement).

Cheers,

jacques
<<section7.1-JD1_MK_JD2.doc>>

section7.1-JD1_MK_JD2.doc