Jerome,
I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing
when referring to MockObjects. What I mean is described in http://www.sidewize.com/company/mockobjects.pdf
and I have a short summary on pros and cons that I
can see when compared with Cactus In-container testing on http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/cactus/mockobjects.html.
I don't see how we could dynamically generate Mock
Objects as these objects are used to write the test cases (which are
static).
I think that what you mean is for the EJB client to
be able to call a mock EJB or the real EJB (with a flag to change from one to
another), is that right ? Mock Objects (in my definition) are used to simulate a
method's interaction with it's surrounding, meaning we mock domain objects
manipulated by the method. I'm referring to Mock objects in the context of
*unit* testing, not more coarse grained unit/functional testing where you would
want to simulate whole parts of a system, like a component in the example of
EJB. This is because the goal of Cactus is to unit test these
components.
Thanks.
Vincent.
|
Title: RE: Mock Objects vs In-Container/Cactus
- Re: Mock Objects vs In-Container/Cactus Bob Davison
- Re: Mock Objects vs In-Container/Cactus Vincent Massol
- Re: Mock Objects Thomas Calivera
- Re: Mock Objects Vincent Massol
- Re: Mock Objects Thomas Calivera
- Re: Mock Objects Alex Fernández
- Re: Mock Objects Thomas Calivera
- RE: Mock Objects vs In-Container/Cactus Jerome Banks
- RE: Mock Objects vs In-Container/Cactus Vincent Massol
- RE: Mock Objects vs In-Container/Cactus Jerome Banks
- Re: Mock Objects vs In-Container/Cactus Bob Davison
- Test classification Vincent Massol
- Re: Test classification Alex Fernández
- Re: Test classification Alex Fernández
- Re: Test classification Vincent Massol
- [cactus] Cactus Logo competition... Vincent Massol
- Re: Test classification Vincent Massol
- Re: Test classification Alex Fernández
- Re: Test classification Thomas Calivera