https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=28615
--- Comment #10 from David Cook <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #9) > My goal is to make it trivial for devs to test behavior. There's nothing > intrinsically bad about mocking the logger. Or doing it your way. > > You are actually mocking some other part of the same thing (the > configuration) and manually capturing STDOUT/STDERR instead of 'the warn > trick'. I wouldn't refer to configuration as mocking. And you don't have to manually capture STDOUT/STDERR. You can use brian d foy's module Test::Output. I use that on other Perl projects for my unit tests. Koha doesn't require it, so I couldn't use it for my tests. > Your code is correct, and makes my point. Compare that boilerplate for just > testing the logger is called, to just calling: I was in a hurry to get that unit test done that day, but Test::Output can be used so that you don't have all that boiler plate. Using Test::Output and Test::Warn would be a more accurate test of how the code actually works in production. > Anyways, I always like different opinions and am open about this. Same. I like to avoid mocks wherever possible and use the real thing, but I figure code speaks louder than words, and I'm not planning on working on my logging testing any time soon or adding Test::Output as a dependency. I thought that I would offer an alternative though, especially since I think we really should stop using Log4Perl to log to files and instead log to STDERR. It'll solve log file permission issues and allow us to leverage built-in web server functionality for logging. But that's just my opinion. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
