-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[MNG-6535] Improve test coverage of UrlNormalizer. #264
Changes from 2 commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -19,52 +19,39 @@ | |
* under the License. | ||
*/ | ||
|
||
import junit.framework.TestCase; | ||
import static org.junit.Assert.assertEquals; | ||
import static org.junit.Assert.assertNull; | ||
|
||
import org.junit.Test; | ||
|
||
/** | ||
* @author Benjamin Bentmann | ||
*/ | ||
public class DefaultUrlNormalizerTest | ||
extends TestCase | ||
{ | ||
|
||
private UrlNormalizer normalizer; | ||
|
||
@Override | ||
protected void setUp() | ||
throws Exception | ||
{ | ||
super.setUp(); | ||
|
||
normalizer = new DefaultUrlNormalizer(); | ||
} | ||
|
||
@Override | ||
protected void tearDown() | ||
throws Exception | ||
{ | ||
normalizer = null; | ||
|
||
super.tearDown(); | ||
} | ||
private UrlNormalizer normalizer = new DefaultUrlNormalizer(); | ||
|
||
private String normalize( String url ) | ||
{ | ||
return normalizer.normalize( url ); | ||
} | ||
|
||
@Test | ||
public void testNullSafe() | ||
{ | ||
assertNull( normalize( null ) ); | ||
} | ||
|
||
@Test | ||
public void testTrailingSlash() | ||
{ | ||
assertEquals( "", normalize( "" ) ); | ||
assertEquals( "http://server.org/dir", normalize( "http://server.org/dir" ) ); | ||
assertEquals( "http://server.org/dir/", normalize( "http://server.org/dir/" ) ); | ||
} | ||
|
||
@Test | ||
public void testRemovalOfParentRefs() | ||
{ | ||
assertEquals( "http://server.org/child", normalize( "http://server.org/parent/../child" ) ); | ||
|
@@ -74,6 +61,7 @@ public void testRemovalOfParentRefs() | |
assertEquals( "http://server.org/child", normalize( "http://server.org/parent//../child" ) ); | ||
} | ||
|
||
@Test | ||
public void testPreservationOfDoubleSlashes() | ||
{ | ||
assertEquals( "scm:hg:ssh://localhost//home/user", normalize( "scm:hg:ssh://localhost//home/user" ) ); | ||
|
@@ -82,4 +70,15 @@ public void testPreservationOfDoubleSlashes() | |
normalize( "[fetch=]http://server.org/[push=]ssh://server.org/" ) ); | ||
} | ||
|
||
@Test | ||
public void relativeUriReferenceLeftUnaffectedWithNoParentDirectoryToAscendTo() | ||
{ | ||
assertEquals( "/../", normalize("/../" ) ); | ||
} | ||
|
||
@Test | ||
public void parentDirectoryRemovedFromRelativeUriReference() | ||
{ | ||
assertEquals( "", normalize( "a/../" ) ); | ||
} | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Maybe the implementation is wrong, but comparing this with Path this is the result:
The Path behavior is also what I would expect. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @rfscholte So our impl is wrong? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm not sure it's worth changing the behaviour; this class is used with absolute URLs (or paths), so this is very much an edge case. However, I think it's (slightly) valuable to test that this case doesn't cause an error -- perhaps a different test name could make that clear? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. If we normalize URLs, the test for relative paths must fail. URLs are absolute. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @josephw Please raise an issue that our impl is wrong. Otherwise we will lose the findings here. Then I will add a comment abour the test referring to the new ticket and merge. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Thinking again; there's no reason to retain the existing behaviour if it's wrong. The change to match Ideally, the interface would be clearer about its contract, but this is the least surprising behaviour. |
||
} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did you test the same with
Path
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Path
andURI
differ slightly here; I've gone with RFC 3986's Remove Dot Segments and adjusted the code to remove them.