> Welcome to Open Source :-) Definitions on what unit tests are/aren't
> w.r.t. to OOP have only recently started to converge around those
> popularized by Martin Fowler, Kent Beck, et al. ('converge' is likely
> too strong a word). It's possible that many developers aren't test
> driven, don't keep up on the test philosophy du jour, and/or don't
> agree with these definitions.
For me it's not so much that it's the philosophy do jour, and I'm not
really that picky about what people call it but I do believe that it's
provably better in almost all cases to have fully isolated unit tests
(regardless of what name people want to apply to them). It doesn't
matter much to me what tools or methods are used to get there so long
as they don't hamper my ability to write tests and helps my ability to
discover / prevent bugs.
>Most days I'm just grateful that our
> agreed upon code review guidelines include checks for tests:
> http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-hadoop/CodeReviewChecklist
Yeah, no complaints there. :)
>
> You can always submit it as part of a patch if the library is license
> compatible:
> http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html
I'll look into that.
--
- kate = masukomi
http://weblog.masukomi.org/
