> -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher Lenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 06 July 2003 18:51 > To: Cactus Developers List > Subject: Re: Unit tests for server side code? > > Vincent Massol wrote: > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Nicholas Lesiecki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>Sent: 06 July 2003 17:15 > >>To: Cactus Developers List > >>Subject: Unit tests for server side code? > > [snip] > > >>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. > > I am also very much in favor of MockObjects dyna mock stuff. It's > extremely nice. (I have no idea though how much the team behind > mockobjects is dedicated to API stability...) >
hehe... I didn't want to sound pessimistic, which is why I did not mention this... :-) They don't care much about API stability and they have never released a version yet... MockObjects 0.09 has been released and they are already breaking compatibility (I have sent an email to try to limit the breakage). That said, I don't think it is unmanageable. I'd still be +1 to use it and create a Gump project to build it from CVS. We would be able to provide them feedback on API stability! :-) > BUT, if we add a dependancy on a mock framework, only *after* we've > branched out 1.5 :-) works for me. -Vincent > > -- > Christopher Lenz > /=/ cmlenz at gmx.de > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
