--- Vincent Massol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't understand. There are two kinds of unit tests: logic unit test, > tested in isolation and integration unit tests. Logic unit test is > executed in the cactus framework project and iut in the sample-servlet > one. What's wrong with this? >
Nothing at all! I understand perfectly. However, there are no luts for any Cactus code that relies on objects like request, session, etc. Anyway, I think that using mocks in the framework is the right way to go, and I agree that we should wait until after 1.5. However, that begs the question--when are we going to branch and/or release 1.5? I have a certain momentum built on this issue now, and I don't want to wait for too long to finish it. If this feature does not make it into 1.5, I strongly suggest that we put it into 1.5.1. It will correct an extremely frustrating bug. Regarding DynaMock, it seems like a good idea. If what you say about it is correct and it is only version 0.09, then I don't think we can reasonably expect API compatiblilty. Cheers, Nick --- Vincent Massol <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Nicholas Lesiecki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: 06 July 2003 17:15 > > To: Cactus Developers List > > Subject: Unit tests for server side code? > > > > Hi guys, > > ' > > I notice we don't have any unit tests for server-side cactus code, or > at > > least, that's what's implied by the following comment: > > > > " Run all the unit tests of Cactus that do not need a servlet > environment > > to > > run. These other tests will be exercised in the sample application." > > > > (From TestAll.java--plus I didn't find any.) > > > > This strikes me as less than desirable, since it makes it hard to > test- > > drive > > my addition of unique keys. After all, the behavior should be > transparent > > from an "integration test" standpoint. > > I don't understand. There are two kinds of unit tests: logic unit test, > tested in isolation and integration unit tests. Logic unit test is > executed in the cactus framework project and iut in the sample-servlet > one. What's wrong with this? > > > > > So, I toyed with the idea of starting to add at least one test (to the > > class > > I was modifying). That prompted me to ask the question: which mock > > framework > > should we use to support our "server-side" unit tests? I'm in favor of > > easymock, since I know it well. However, I feel that the rest of the > team > > may have more thoroughly researched opinions than mine on the subject. > > Yeah, we've not had to use any mockobject fwk so far and you're right we > need to pick one for our logic unit tests. I personally prefer DynaMock. > I find EasyMock too verbose. I'm including an example project comparing > the two (it also compares Cactus with them). Of course the example is > really simplistic but when the examples become more complex, DynaMock > shines. > > -Vincent > > > > > Cheers, > > Nick > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ATTACHMENT part 2 application/x-zip-compressed name=comparison.zip > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
