yes! some times it gives you great flexibility and it is not wise to avoid it completelly. but for many cases it is much more simpler to let system generate smart box for me.
On Oct 20, 9:32 pm, "Tim Barcz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > define your usage of "test doubles"....do you mean "hand written > mocks/stubs"? > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 2:26 PM, naraga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > i think you are right. maybe ayende has more to say about this ... > > btw. who are your attendees? people aware of mocking as general > > topic? > > from my experience when i jumped into Rhino on my presentations to > > people with no experience > > then it everytime ended up with wierd face expressions :) > > so last time i tried to mention Rhino only slightly at the end of the > > presentation when everyone agreed that amount of code > > i had to write to create test-doubles was just too big. > > > On Oct 20, 5:37 pm, "Tim Barcz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Good point....forgot about PropertyBehavior (but in this case isn't that > > > behavior on a stub an augmentation of a mock's behavior? On the Rhino > > site > > > it says you can do property behavior but that it gets tedious, so instead > > > you can just do a stub.) > > > > I was hoping to simplify the concepts for the attendees of my Rhino > > > presentation. That's the goal, to get more people testing with Rhino. > > > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 10:26 AM, naraga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > then i think it is too oversimplified. stubs in rhino are optimized to > > > > behave as closely as possible to real objects that are being faked. > > > > this means that stubs maintain state for properties for example > > > > (PropertyBehaviour). > > > > > On Oct 20, 5:20 pm, "Tim Barcz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I'm familiar with the fowler article and mocking in general...I'm > > talking > > > > in > > > > > terms of Rhino.... > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Shane Courtrille < > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I'd recommend you start here... > > > > > > >http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 6:09 AM, Tim Barcz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > > > > > > >> Am working on a code camp presentation and am trying to distill > > the > > > > > >> subject of mocking with Rhino down to the easiest possible > > concepts I > > > > can > > > > > >> think of. > > > > > > >> Would you say the following statement is true or false? > > > > > > >> Mocks and stubs are the same, except that you can put an > > expectation > > > > on a > > > > > >> mock. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rhino.Mocks" group. To post to this group, send email to RhinoMocks@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/RhinoMocks?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
