Xcode 10 and super.tearDown
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;
}
Since Xcode 10.1(maybe 10) when I create a Unit test file I don't have calls super.tearDown() and super.setUp() .
I've not seen such changes in release notes.
In documentation https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest/xctestcase/understanding_setup_and_teardown_for_test_methods are still here.
So my question should I still write super.tearDown() and super.setUp()?
class SomethingTests: XCTestCase {
override func setUp() {
// Put setup code here. This method is called before the invocation of each test method in the class.
}
override func tearDown() {
// Put teardown code here. This method is called after the invocation of each test method in the class.
}
func testExample() {
// This is an example of a functional test case.
// Use XCTAssert and related functions to verify your tests produce the correct results.
}
func testPerformanceExample() {
// This is an example of a performance test case.
self.measure {
// Put the code you want to measure the time of here.
}
}
}
xcode xctest teardown
asked Nov 23 '18 at 14:30
Andrii KuzminskyiAndrii Kuzminskyi
3125
add a comment |
Since Xcode 10.1(maybe 10) when I create a Unit test file I don't have calls super.tearDown() and super.setUp() .
I've not seen such changes in release notes.
In documentation https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest/xctestcase/understanding_setup_and_teardown_for_test_methods are still here.
So my question should I still write super.tearDown() and super.setUp()?
class SomethingTests: XCTestCase {
override func setUp() {
// Put setup code here. This method is called before the invocation of each test method in the class.
}
override func tearDown() {
// Put teardown code here. This method is called after the invocation of each test method in the class.
}
func testExample() {
// This is an example of a functional test case.
// Use XCTAssert and related functions to verify your tests produce the correct results.
}
func testPerformanceExample() {
// This is an example of a performance test case.
self.measure {
// Put the code you want to measure the time of here.
}
}
}
xcode xctest teardown
asked Nov 23 '18 at 14:30
Andrii KuzminskyiAndrii Kuzminskyi
3125
add a comment |
Since Xcode 10.1(maybe 10) when I create a Unit test file I don't have calls super.tearDown() and super.setUp() .
I've not seen such changes in release notes.
In documentation https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest/xctestcase/understanding_setup_and_teardown_for_test_methods are still here.
So my question should I still write super.tearDown() and super.setUp()?
class SomethingTests: XCTestCase {
override func setUp() {
// Put setup code here. This method is called before the invocation of each test method in the class.
}
override func tearDown() {
// Put teardown code here. This method is called after the invocation of each test method in the class.
}
func testExample() {
// This is an example of a functional test case.
// Use XCTAssert and related functions to verify your tests produce the correct results.
}
func testPerformanceExample() {
// This is an example of a performance test case.
self.measure {
// Put the code you want to measure the time of here.
}
}
}
xcode xctest teardown
asked Nov 23 '18 at 14:30
Andrii KuzminskyiAndrii Kuzminskyi
3125
Since Xcode 10.1(maybe 10) when I create a Unit test file I don't have calls super.tearDown() and super.setUp() .
I've not seen such changes in release notes.
In documentation https://developer.apple.com/documentation/xctest/xctestcase/understanding_setup_and_teardown_for_test_methods are still here.
So my question should I still write super.tearDown() and super.setUp()?
class SomethingTests: XCTestCase {
override func setUp() {
// Put setup code here. This method is called before the invocation of each test method in the class.
}
override func tearDown() {
// Put teardown code here. This method is called after the invocation of each test method in the class.
}
func testExample() {
// This is an example of a functional test case.
// Use XCTAssert and related functions to verify your tests produce the correct results.
}
func testPerformanceExample() {
// This is an example of a performance test case.
self.measure {
// Put the code you want to measure the time of here.
}
}
}
xcode xctest teardown
xcode xctest teardown
asked Nov 23 '18 at 14:30
Andrii KuzminskyiAndrii Kuzminskyi
3125
asked Nov 23 '18 at 14:30
Andrii KuzminskyiAndrii Kuzminskyi
3125
asked Nov 23 '18 at 14:30
Andrii KuzminskyiAndrii Kuzminskyi
3125
asked Nov 23 '18 at 14:30
Andrii KuzminskyiAndrii Kuzminskyi
3125
asked Nov 23 '18 at 14:30
Andrii KuzminskyiAndrii Kuzminskyi
3125
3125
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
For a direct subclass of XCTestCase, there never was any change of behavior for not calling super.setUp(). That's because setUp and tearDown are template methods with empty implementations at the top level.
Though there's no change in behavior, omitting the calls to super means that if you create a test hierarchy with more than one level, you'll have to add them back.
When would you ever have more than one level? There are two cases:
- When you want to reuse the same tests for different scenarios.
- When you subclass XCTestCase to make a customized helper.
These don't happen every day. But they do happen. Deciding "I need it here, but I don't need it there" is perilous. So I'd just call super all the time.
answered Nov 24 '18 at 6:13
Jon ReidJon Reid
16.3k24978
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53448538%2fxcode-10-and-super-teardown%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
For a direct subclass of XCTestCase, there never was any change of behavior for not calling super.setUp(). That's because setUp and tearDown are template methods with empty implementations at the top level.
Though there's no change in behavior, omitting the calls to super means that if you create a test hierarchy with more than one level, you'll have to add them back.
When would you ever have more than one level? There are two cases:
- When you want to reuse the same tests for different scenarios.
- When you subclass XCTestCase to make a customized helper.
These don't happen every day. But they do happen. Deciding "I need it here, but I don't need it there" is perilous. So I'd just call super all the time.
answered Nov 24 '18 at 6:13
Jon ReidJon Reid
16.3k24978
add a comment |
For a direct subclass of XCTestCase, there never was any change of behavior for not calling super.setUp(). That's because setUp and tearDown are template methods with empty implementations at the top level.
Though there's no change in behavior, omitting the calls to super means that if you create a test hierarchy with more than one level, you'll have to add them back.
When would you ever have more than one level? There are two cases:
- When you want to reuse the same tests for different scenarios.
- When you subclass XCTestCase to make a customized helper.
These don't happen every day. But they do happen. Deciding "I need it here, but I don't need it there" is perilous. So I'd just call super all the time.
answered Nov 24 '18 at 6:13
Jon ReidJon Reid
16.3k24978
add a comment |
For a direct subclass of XCTestCase, there never was any change of behavior for not calling super.setUp(). That's because setUp and tearDown are template methods with empty implementations at the top level.
Though there's no change in behavior, omitting the calls to super means that if you create a test hierarchy with more than one level, you'll have to add them back.
When would you ever have more than one level? There are two cases:
- When you want to reuse the same tests for different scenarios.
- When you subclass XCTestCase to make a customized helper.
These don't happen every day. But they do happen. Deciding "I need it here, but I don't need it there" is perilous. So I'd just call super all the time.
answered Nov 24 '18 at 6:13
Jon ReidJon Reid
16.3k24978
For a direct subclass of XCTestCase, there never was any change of behavior for not calling super.setUp(). That's because setUp and tearDown are template methods with empty implementations at the top level.
Though there's no change in behavior, omitting the calls to super means that if you create a test hierarchy with more than one level, you'll have to add them back.
When would you ever have more than one level? There are two cases:
- When you want to reuse the same tests for different scenarios.
- When you subclass XCTestCase to make a customized helper.
These don't happen every day. But they do happen. Deciding "I need it here, but I don't need it there" is perilous. So I'd just call super all the time.
answered Nov 24 '18 at 6:13
Jon ReidJon Reid
16.3k24978
answered Nov 24 '18 at 6:13
Jon ReidJon Reid
16.3k24978
answered Nov 24 '18 at 6:13
Jon ReidJon Reid
16.3k24978
answered Nov 24 '18 at 6:13
Jon ReidJon Reid
16.3k24978
16.3k24978
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53448538%2fxcode-10-and-super-teardown%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
