jakarta-cactus-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Lesiecki Nicholas <ndlesie...@yahoo.com>
Subject 1.5 Date WAS: RE: Unit tests for server side code?
Date Mon, 07 Jul 2003 15:39:52 GMT

--- Vincent Massol <vmassol@pivolis.com> wrote:
> I don't understand. There are two kinds of unit tests: logic unit test,
> tested in isolation and integration unit tests. Logic unit test is
> executed in the cactus framework project and iut in the sample-servlet
> one. What's wrong with this?
> 

Nothing at all! I understand perfectly. However, there are no luts for any
Cactus code that relies on objects like request, session, etc. Anyway, I
think that using mocks in the framework is the right way to go, and I agree
that we should wait until after 1.5. However, that begs the question--when
are we going to branch and/or release 1.5? I have a certain momentum built
on this issue  now, and I don't want to wait for too long to finish it.

If this feature does not make it into 1.5, I strongly suggest that we put
it into 1.5.1. It will correct an extremely frustrating bug.

Regarding DynaMock, it seems like a good idea. If what you say about it is
correct and it is only version 0.09, then I don't think we can reasonably
expect API compatiblilty. 

Cheers,
Nick
--- Vincent Massol <vmassol@pivolis.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Nicholas Lesiecki [mailto:ndlesiecki@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: 06 July 2003 17:15
> > To: Cactus Developers List
> > Subject: Unit tests for server side code?
> > 
> > Hi guys,
> > '
> > I notice we don't have any unit tests for server-side cactus code, or
> at
> > least, that's what's implied by the following comment:
> > 
> > " Run all the unit tests of Cactus that do not need a servlet
> environment
> > to
> > run. These other tests will be exercised in the sample application."
> > 
> > (From TestAll.java--plus I didn't find any.)
> > 
> > This strikes me as less than desirable, since it makes it hard to
> test-
> > drive
> > my addition of unique keys. After all, the behavior should be
> transparent
> > from an "integration test" standpoint.
> 
> I don't understand. There are two kinds of unit tests: logic unit test,
> tested in isolation and integration unit tests. Logic unit test is
> executed in the cactus framework project and iut in the sample-servlet
> one. What's wrong with this?
> 
> > 
> > So, I toyed with the idea of starting to add at least one test (to the
> > class
> > I was modifying). That prompted me to ask the question: which mock
> > framework
> > should we use to support our "server-side" unit tests? I'm in favor of
> > easymock, since I know it well. However, I feel that the rest of the
> team
> > may have more thoroughly researched opinions than mine on the subject.
> 
> Yeah, we've not had to use any mockobject fwk so far and you're right we
> need to pick one for our logic unit tests. I personally prefer DynaMock.
> I find EasyMock too verbose. I'm including an example project comparing
> the two (it also compares Cactus with them). Of course the example is
> really simplistic but when the examples become more complex, DynaMock
> shines.
> 
> -Vincent
> 
> > 
> > Cheers,
> > Nick
> > 
> > 
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cactus-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: cactus-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org
> 
> 

> ATTACHMENT part 2 application/x-zip-compressed name=comparison.zip
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cactus-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: cactus-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cactus-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: cactus-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message