Re: testing local functions?
On 10 September 2010 12:24, alux alu...@googlemail.com wrote: I always thought it to be good style to make helper functions only as visible as needed, e.g. by using letfn. But when I want to test my code, I just dont see a way to access these local functions for tests. I don't believe you can. You could make them private functions, and then test them by referring directly to their vars, e.g. (#'your.namespace/private-function ...) But in general, your tests should be testing your public interface, not a specific implementation. Your tests shouldn't care what your code does behind the scenes, so long as the publicly accessible functions return the correct result. - James -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
Re: testing local functions?
Hi James, thanks for your answer. your tests should be testing your public interface Hhmmm. Well, I tend to disagree here. I sometimes like to have tests in place for things I want to refactor. To not inadvertently do something foolish. But I agree that this is not easily accomplishable. Greetings, alux On 10 Sep., 13:39, James Reeves jree...@weavejester.com wrote: On 10 September 2010 12:24, alux alu...@googlemail.com wrote: I always thought it to be good style to make helper functions only as visible as needed, e.g. by using letfn. But when I want to test my code, I just dont see a way to access these local functions for tests. I don't believe you can. You could make them private functions, and then test them by referring directly to their vars, e.g. (#'your.namespace/private-function ...) But in general, your tests should be testing your public interface, not a specific implementation. Your tests shouldn't care what your code does behind the scenes, so long as the publicly accessible functions return the correct result. - James -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
Re: testing local functions?
From someone who's window to your code is your public API, a refactoring should make no observable change. So if you only test on the public API, but you test it thoroughly, then your tests will ensure that this property holds. Tests that delve into implementation details and private things, are more brittle because they are affected by changes in implementation details. On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 14:16, alux alu...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi James, thanks for your answer. your tests should be testing your public interface Hhmmm. Well, I tend to disagree here. I sometimes like to have tests in place for things I want to refactor. To not inadvertently do something foolish. But I agree that this is not easily accomplishable. Greetings, alux On 10 Sep., 13:39, James Reeves jree...@weavejester.com wrote: On 10 September 2010 12:24, alux alu...@googlemail.com wrote: I always thought it to be good style to make helper functions only as visible as needed, e.g. by using letfn. But when I want to test my code, I just dont see a way to access these local functions for tests. I don't believe you can. You could make them private functions, and then test them by referring directly to their vars, e.g. (#'your.namespace/private-function ...) But in general, your tests should be testing your public interface, not a specific implementation. Your tests shouldn't care what your code does behind the scenes, so long as the publicly accessible functions return the correct result. - James -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -- Venlig hilsen / Kind regards, Christian Vest Hansen. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
Re: testing local functions?
I've worked out a way to test local functions. When I tried it out by hand, it felt good. See here: http://bit.ly/b1AoG7 Implementing it is on my wishlist for Midje, my test framework. http://github.com/marick/Midje On Sep 10, 2010, at 6:24 AM, alux wrote: Hello, I always thought it to be good style to make helper functions only as visible as needed, e.g. by using letfn. But when I want to test my code, I just dont see a way to access these local functions for tests. - Brian Marick, independent consultant Mostly on agile methods with a testing slant Author of /Programming Cocoa with Ruby/ www.exampler.com, www.exampler.com/blog, www.twitter.com/marick -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
Re: testing local functions?
Brian, thats way cool! (I still have to think this through, thats high magic!) Thank you for sharing this, and kind regards, alux On 10 Sep., 21:04, Brian Marick mar...@exampler.com wrote: I've worked out a way to test local functions. When I tried it out by hand, it felt good. See here:http://bit.ly/b1AoG7 Implementing it is on my wishlist for Midje, my test framework.http://github.com/marick/Midje On Sep 10, 2010, at 6:24 AM, alux wrote: Hello, I always thought it to be good style to make helper functions only as visible as needed, e.g. by using letfn. But when I want to test my code, I just dont see a way to access these local functions for tests. - Brian Marick, independent consultant Mostly on agile methods with a testing slant Author of /Programming Cocoa with Ruby/www.exampler.com,www.exampler.com/blog,www.twitter.com/marick -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Clojure group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
