I think that is one of the good points. If I test an interface of sending an request and getting a response I'm not interested in network stuff. I want to test my software and not my network stack. And I like to force errornous behavior in order to test error handling of my software. Finally I want to habe reliable tests which is hard to achieve if you allocate system resources. That means I don't want to randomly shuffle port numbers and hope it doesn't clash if tests are executed in parallel.
It is just that mocks are hard to apply. Norbert > Am 02.03.2016 um 22:15 schrieb Chris Muller <ma.chri...@gmail.com>: > > I assume the mock object does not exercise any real network code or > primitives. > >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 2:43 PM, Norbert Hartl <norb...@hartl.name> wrote: >> >>> Am 02.03.2016 um 17:27 schrieb Chris Muller <asquea...@gmail.com>: >>> >>> A mock network will never test as thoroughly as locahost network.. >> Why? Please elaborate! >> >> Norbert >> >>>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 6:32 AM, Yuriy Tymchuk <yuriy.tymc...@me.com> wrote: >>>> HI, there is one thing in Ruby (on Rails) that I really like and it is a >>>> option to mock network. This means that when you run a test your network >>>> requests are handled by a mock object and you can tell it that for this >>>> URI it should give you this response. This is helpful if you don’t want to >>>> rely on a network availability or test certain corner cases. >>>> >>>> Is there anything like this in Pharo? >>>> >>>> Uko >>