On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 04:54:07PM +0100, Greg Stark wrote: > On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 2:16 PM, David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> wrote: > > I'm given to understand that this tight coupling is necessary for > > performance. Are you saying that it could be unwound, or that > > testing strategies mostly need to take it into account, or...? > > I'm just saying that we shouldn't expect to find a magic bullet test > framework that solves all these problems. Without restructuring > code, which I don't think is really feasible, we won't be able to > have good unit test coverage for most existing code. > > It might be more practical to start using such a new tool for new > code only. Then the new code could be structured in ways that allow > the environment to be mocked more easily and the results observed > more easily.
Great! Do we have examples of such tools and code bases structured to accommodate them that we'd like to use for reference, or at least for inspiration? Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
