On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer <gust...@niemeyer.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Andrew Wilkins > <andrew.wilk...@canonical.com> wrote: > > I basically agree with everything below, but strongly disagree that > mocking > > implies you know exactly what the code is doing internally. A good > interface > > I'm also in agreement about your points. But just so you understand > where Roger is coming from, the term "mocking" is often [1] associated > with a test style that does bind very closely to what the code does. > But you're probably using the term more loosely for test doubles in > general, and I'm all for not being pedantic, so yes, +1 to the > intention of what you've said. > > [1] http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html Thanks Gustavo, I was indeed abusing the term.
-- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
