Oh, how profound and .. abstruse. On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 03:04, Dhanji R. Prasanna <[email protected]> wrote: > This is exactly why there is no Spring or Guice in the Ruby world. =D > > (Yes I know about Needle.) > 2009/3/26 Endre Stølsvik <[email protected]> >> >> I find it pretty interesting that such /absolutely fundamental/ >> aspects are discussed: In essence, the actual reason for Guice and >> other DI frameworks' existence. >> >> For my part, I side with at least Daniel, but actually find the answer >> even more on the opposite of Dhanji's arguments, and IIUC, so does at >> least the entire Spring world: I believe the stance there is that you >> do /not/ use the framework for testing - in tests, you actually wire >> up the tested class by hand, of course mocking some or all of the >> dependencies. When that is said, I personally often find myself doing >> higher level integration testing, and thus I use Guice but with some >> modules switched out with testing versions. >> >> From >> http://static.springframework.org/spring/docs/2.5.x/reference/testing.html >> "8.2 One of the main benefits of Dependency Injection is that your >> code should really depend far less on the container than in >> traditional J2EE development. The POJOs that comprise your application >> should be testable in JUnit or TestNG tests, with objects simply >> instantiated using the new operator, /without Spring or any other >> container/." (emphasis not mine!) >> >> Endre. >> >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 10:50, Daniel <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > One of the main points of DI is testability, but the point of using a >> > DI framework is to remove the need to write lots of factory code. >> > That's the reason I use guice it anyway. >> > >> > Dan. >> > >> > On Mar 25, 2:41 am, "Dhanji R. Prasanna" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Brian Pontarelli >> >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> >> >> > Someone still has to create the classes and wire everything together. >> >> > Duck-typing doesn't really help or hurt. >> >> >> >> That's no pain at all since everything is mockable in Ruby without >> >> interfaces or constructor separation. You can even redefine classes on >> >> the >> >> fly for test cases. The main point of dependency injection is >> >> testability, >> >> the rest is... well, nice, but not really germane to the the design >> >> pattern. >> >> >> >> Dhanji. >> > > >> > >> >> > > > > >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "google-guice" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
