Well,
what I meant was that with JMock I can do stuff like
mock.expects(atLeastOnce()).method(m).with(...)
.will( onConsecutiveCalls(
returnValue(10),
returnValue(20),
throwException(new IOException("end of stream")) ) );
Instead of writing/programming to much logic into the mocks.
-Matthias
On 7/5/06, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Matthias,
Could you say a little more about what sort of intelligence
you need in the mocks? For more "intelligent" mocks, I
usually subclass the base test ones (e.g., the MExternalContext
class over in the renderkit test package).
I'm happy with using jmock for objects like listeners, converters,
validators, where we're trying to test if our components are
correctly calling these objects.
-- Adam
On 7/4/06, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey devs,
>
> today I committed some stuff I did on the mock overhaul bransch.
> These things work out of the box with shale-test 1.0.2;
> (still some clean ups needed)
>
> Now, I *must* uses 1.0.3-SNAPSHOT (only on my box), b/c of a fixed
> "bug" in shale.
> However, I am also at that stage, where I need more *inteligent* mocks
> that only "dummy objects".
>
> I'd like to introduce jmock also for stuff like converters and validators.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Happy independenc day :)
> (damn that Italy brought down my feelings...)
>
> -Matthias
>
--
Matthias Wessendorf
Aechterhoek 18
48282 Emsdetten
blog: http://jroller.com/page/mwessendorf
mail: mwessendorf-at-gmail-dot-com
