hivemind-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jean-Francois Poilpret" <>
Subject RE: Overriding services
Date Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:11:58 GMT
Hello Knut,

Yes of course I did that for my _true_ unit tests.

But I wanted to go further with partial _integration_ tests within HiveMind
(in particular I wanted to check that my contribution rules worked OK and I
got the List of the right objects, for that, obviously, I need to integrate
with HiveMind). However, I would like to avoid _full_ integration tests for
the moment (I mean, let Hibernate aside in my partial integration tests).

So the reason of my question.


-----Original Message-----
From: Knut Wannheden [] 
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 4:07 PM
Subject: Re: Overriding services


I'm not sure I quite understand your problem.  But can't you just
write your test for service B without using HiveMind? E.g.

A mockA = new AMockImp();
B b = new BImpl();

Also note the services hivemind.lib.DefaultImplementationFactory and


On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:45:24 +0700, Jean-Francois Poilpret
<> wrote:
> Hi,
> Yesterday I was stuck with the following problem:
> - I have a service-point A that is used internally by some other
> service-point B
> - service-point A implementation depends on some "heavy" processing (it
> Hibernate to create a SessionFactory based on a configuration file and
> additional properties)
> I had the need to do some "partial integration test" of service B inside
> HiveMind, but I did not want to use real Hibernate stuff (this would make
> the test too long and uselessly complicated).
> Originally, in the module where services A and B are defined, I put the
> implementation declaration for A directly in service-point declaration.
> But then I could not override A implementation for testing purposes (for
> testing I needed to mock service A implementation).
> So I started to check how I could "override" service A implementation for
> tests.
> On Hibernate web site, there is a page on overriding services, this way is
> probably a good way to follow for a service-point that is _intended_ to be
> overridden by the application, but I found it a bit heavy just for testing
> purposes.
> Finally, I could not come out with a _good_ solution to my problem and I
> gave up to what I considered the best solution I had on-hand for the job
> (best but not really good actually):
> - in module descriptor for services A & B, I removed the "invoke-factory"
> from service-point A, just keeping the service-point declaration.
> - in my tests, I had a descriptor that includes the implementation for
> service A (in this case the implementation points to a class that is
> directly defined in my test case, and that delegates all method calls to a
> Mock object)
> - unfortunately (this is where the solution is not really good), in the
> final application descriptor module, I (and other application developers
> too) _have_ to include the implementation for service A, although it is
> supposed to be always the same.
> I think that, probably (as suggested in the web page regarding override of
> services), it would be interesting to have a HiveMind-defined way to do
> that, ie:
> - defining a default implementation for a service-point
> - having the built-in possibility to override it in another module
> In the situation of my test case, it would have the advantage of being
> unobtrusive to the end-application developer.
> Should this be an enhancement request?
> Or have other developers in the list faced the same problem and could come
> out with a different solution?
> Cheers
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message