[jdom-interest] minor bug in TestCaseGenerator

[philip.nelson at omniresources.com]

but it means that you can't use the ant build!  Just change the package name
on line 119

was

ClassGenerator.generate( file, mangledClassName,
"jdom.org.test.cases", mangled );

should be

ClassGenerator.generate( file, mangledClassName,
"org.jdom.test.cases", mangled );

All the generated classes need to be rebuilt of course

Also in TestCase_PartialList.java

Line 80 should read

	public void testMethod_Object_toArray(){

and line 83 should read
	public void testMethod_Object_toArray__Object(){


the "mangler" was putting ";" in strange places on these lines.

For the record, I am currently working on TestCase_Attribute.


Received: from mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (mta5.snfc21.pbi.net [206.13.28.241])
	by dorothy.denveronline.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA14761
	for <jdom-interest at jdom.org>; Sun, 25 Jun 2000 18:36:18 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from sumi ([63.197.4.191])
 by mta5.snfc21.pbi.net (Sun Internet Mail Server sims.3.5.2000.01.05.12.18.p9)
 with SMTP id <0FWQ00DDEKAVSN at mta5.snfc21.pbi.net> for jdom-interest at jdom.org;
 Sun, 25 Jun 2000 17:35:19 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 09:13:55 -0700
From: Josh Rehman <jrehman at pacbell.net>
Subject: RE: [jdom-interest] Disruptive technologies
In-reply-to: <39550509.D92FBC03 at digitalanywhere.com>
To: jdom-interest at jdom.org
Message-id: <000301bfddf7$32bc3900$0200a8c0 at freebooks.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Importance: Normal
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Sender: jdom-interest-admin at jdom.org
Errors-To: jdom-interest-admin at jdom.org
X-BeenThere: jdom-interest at jdom.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta2
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: JDOM Mailing List for General Issues and Updates <jdom-interest.jdom.org>

I did not understand Simon's article. It appears to be a rather high level
speculative article about the implications of XML. I believe that a
restatement of his thesis, without jargon ('disruptive technology'?!), would
be, "XML implies wider changes to internet technologies than most would
believe." How is this thesis supported?

There are 2 sections, one on XMLs impact on current technology, and a
shorter speculative section.

Maybe its my fault that I don't really understand what "XML demands
"adaptive reuse" of existing infrastructure" means. Even with the examples
that follow (which I assume are meant to illustrate what the term "adaptive
reuse" means), it doesn't become clear. Again, its probably my fault since I
am not up on many of the protocol initiatives that Simon mentions (XML-RPC,
SOAP, new MIME identifiers!).

For better or for worse, I have a hard time understanding solutions to
problems that I haven't had, can't anticipate, and don't have a good way to
visualize. And I'm a programmer! I can only imagine how well these kinds of
arguments would go over with management staff, when talking about
anticipating the reimplimention of core infrastructure (Scenario: 'OK Bob,
XML is disruptive. Plan on replacing any software that even knows about the
existance of HTTP, SMTP, MIME, or URIs. I know, its a big headache but you
might as well bite the bullet. Why should you do this? Ha, I just told you!
XML is a disruptive technology!')

Don't get me wrong, I love abstraction as a tool to make concrete problems
more tenable. But Simon's article was a bit too far in the clouds for me.
But it just seemed a restatment of what every programmer knows: data
structures are the core of any software system. Change these strucutures,
and the system will drastically change. XML represents an oppurtunity to
recast common data structures into a homogenous format, which improves data
exchange mechanisms between disparate systems. Because of this, distributed
systems will change, simplify, and become more common. Why all the drama?