In article e88f4781-4b1f-4a9d-8c61-3a13c854c...@d27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com,
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 16, 10:30=A0pm, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com writes:
And I have already refused to write totally isolated tests, because
Albert van der Horst alb...@spenarnc.xs4all.nl writes:
Unit testing is a concept that goes well with functions without side
effects. If you have classes, that doesn't work so well.
How so? Unit tests are ideal for testing classes, in my experience; they
can be inspected and tested as a
On Feb 18, 3:20 am, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com writes:
Right, isolation [of test cases] is essential. But I can't decide to
which extent I should propagate isolation.
You used “propagate” in a sense I don't understand there.
For example,
On Feb 16, 7:38 pm, Phlip phlip2...@gmail.com wrote:
This paper _almost_ gets the
idea:http://www.netobjectives.com/download/Code%20Qualities%20and%20Practi...
Do you run your tests after the fewest possible edits? Such as 1-3
lines of code?
Hi!
I run my tests all the time (they almost
On Feb 16, 10:30 pm, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com writes:
And I have already refused to write totally isolated tests, because it
looks like a great waste of time.
It only looks like that until you chase your tail in a long, fruitless
Lacrima wrote:
I run my tests all the time (they almost replaced debugger in my IDE).
But there are times, when I can't just run tests after 1-3 lines of
code.
...
Maybe it's not proper TDD
You are still being too literal. The 1-3 lines of code guideline is
a guideline, not a rule. It means
Phlip wrote:
On Feb 17, 6:26 am, Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com wrote:
Right, isolation is essential.
Please read my reply: Ben is well intentioned but completely wrong
here.
Mock abuse will not cure the runtime isolation problem.
I believe that Ben is perfectly correct, and that you
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com writes:
Right, isolation [of test cases] is essential. But I can't decide to
which extent I should propagate isolation.
You used “propagate” in a sense I don't understand there.
For example, in Python Testing: Beginner's Guide by Daniel Arbuckle,
author
On Feb 16, 2:17 am, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com writes:
Minimock has wider usage and community, but I have some troubles using
it. Maybe I am wrong, but with minimock you always have to keep track
the order of imports in your test modules.
On Feb 15, 9:56 pm, Phlip phlip2...@gmail.com wrote:
Lacrima wrote:
Thanks for your reply! Isn't what you are talking about integration
tests? And unit tests should be fully isolated? So even for method
'some_method()' of class A I should mock instance of class A (i.e. to
mock 'self') to
On Feb 16, 12:30 pm, Ben Finney ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au wrote:
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com writes:
And I have already refused to write totally isolated tests, because it
looks like a great waste of time.
It only looks like that until you chase your tail in a long, fruitless
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com writes:
And I have already refused to write totally isolated tests, because it
looks like a great waste of time.
It only looks like that until you chase your tail in a long, fruitless
debugging session because (you later realise) the behaviour of one test
is
Hello!
I am newbie mastering test driven development. I can't clarify myself
which mock library to use.
There are number of them and which one do you prefer?
Two libraries that attracted my attention are:
* minimock
* dingus
As for me the latest one, dingus, is the easiest (see this screencast:
Lacrima wrote:
I am newbie mastering test driven development. I can't clarify myself
which mock library to use.
There are number of them and which one do you prefer?
Two libraries that attracted my attention are:
* minimock
* dingus
As for me the latest one, dingus, is the easiest (see
On Feb 15, 8:15 am, Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
I am newbie mastering test driven development. I can't clarify myself
which mock library to use.
There are number of them and which one do you prefer?
Two libraries that attracted my attention are:
* minimock
* dingus
As
On Feb 15, 6:57 pm, Phlip phlip2...@gmail.com wrote:
Lacrima wrote:
I am newbie mastering test driven development. I can't clarify myself
which mock library to use.
There are number of them and which one do you prefer?
Two libraries that attracted my attention are:
* minimock
*
Lacrima wrote:
Thanks for your reply! Isn't what you are talking about integration
tests? And unit tests should be fully isolated? So even for method
'some_method()' of class A I should mock instance of class A (i.e. to
mock 'self') to test 'some_method()'.
Unit test is a high-end QA
Lacrima lacrima.ma...@gmail.com writes:
Minimock has wider usage and community, but I have some troubles using
it. Maybe I am wrong, but with minimock you always have to keep track
the order of imports in your test modules. Well, may be I just don't
understand fully how minimock works.
I'm
18 matches
Mail list logo
