As yet another alternative, last week I committed the mock objects suite that I've been using personally into sandbox/trunk/struts-shale-test. It's got mocks for JSF objects as well as the servlet ones, which could easily be stripped out or conditionally compiled if you want a set that doesn't require the JSF APIs to be present.
Craig On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 10:40:54 -0800, Tom Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You may want to try EasyMock instead of these mock servlet api > implementations > http://www.easymock.org/ > > Once you get your head around how this works, you may not go back to using > concrete > Mock objects again. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Germuska [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 6:15 AM > To: Martin Cooper; Struts Developers List > Subject: Re: Experiences with MockObjects for Servlet testing? > > At 4:44 PM -0800 11/22/04, Martin Cooper wrote: > >On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 16:28:32 -0800, Don Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Perhaps this might be a good time to bring up the idea of bringing > >> StrutsTestCase as a Struts subproject? They have an implementation > >> of the servlet api for testing. > > > >Also, someone (Howard?) mentioned at ApacheCon that ServletUnit is a > >good, stable, full-featured framework for testing, well, servlet-based > >code. I'd like us to take a look at that before we make any hard > >decisions about testing frameworks. > > I thought I knew, but then when I went investigating, I ran into the > question of just what (or which) is servletunit? > > There's a fairly dormant Sourceforge Project: > http://servletunit.sourceforge.net/ where code is in the package > com.kizna.servletunit > > It's the top-level package for StrutsTestCase: > http://strutstestcase.sourceforge.net/api/index.html > > HTTPUnit has a servletunit package (com.meterware.servletunit): > http://httpunit.sourceforge.net/doc/api/index.html > > I think one (or more) of these might be as good or better as having > Cactus tests in Struts as a whole -- but I still would prefer to use > MockObjects for the kind of isolated testing I was trying to do with > the CreateAction yesterday, so as to minimize the amount of > extraneous setup required. That is, I'd prefer to use MockObjects if > it worked for the test I needed. I suppose if we were using a mock > servlet environment, I might be able to use components from it > without having to simulate an entire Struts installation. (I see > that the "ServletContextSimulator" in StrutsTestCase simply returns > null for an attribute which isn't in the servlet context, which would > be all I needed...) > > Joe > > -- > Joe Germuska > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://blog.germuska.com > "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
