On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 7:34 PM, Stephen Haberman <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > If the former, then I understand it as mostly a mean to provide > > mocks/stubs/fakes for testing. How about gwt-mockito then? > > https://github.com/google/gwtmockito > > This is tangenting a bit...but... :-) > > I know everyone uses them, but IMO mocks are less than ideal for > testing UI code. With stubs, you can have state and semi-intelligent > behavior without repeating every test the same "oh, right, this is how > a textbox works...when call this, then return that, expect so and so", > etc. > Just for the sake of correctness; You can still have similar stubs like you have today based on gwt-mockito (if you don't like mockito's 'expect' style). > > That said, mocks are a personal preference, and while nifty tools like > gwt-mockito exist for the current state of affairs, I don't think that > means > making life easier for everyone (by making the require for gwt-mockito go > away) > is a bad thing. > > - Stephen > > -- > http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "GWT Contributors" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Contributors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
