I was being facetious ... On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 2:29 PM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hm, listen to my DNR from Oredev about Rhino Mocks.Specifically, to Carl > asking what Rhino Mocks is. > > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:09 PM, Tim Barcz <[email protected]> wrote: > >> ....ah...yes I see...we need a Wizard (very good, let's do it!). >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Jason Meckley <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >>> Alex, a simpler API would lower the entry level. But lets also not >>> forget (as much as we want to) the entry level for .net development is >>> "where is the IDE Wizard?" >>> that said moving the old syntax to another namespace still makes the >>> option available and can confuse the developer. If you're trying to >>> reduce the surface area, and reduce friction; move the old >>> functionality to another assembly (Rhino.Mocks.OldSchool.dll). This >>> way the user needs 2 assemblies for backwards compatibility. moving >>> forward (4.1?) Rhino.Mocks.OldSchool.dll is dropped altogether. >>> >>> On Sep 1, 12:55 pm, Alex McMahon <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > I think a good goal is to reduce the barrier to entry of Rhino Mocks. >>> > I see a lot of questions being asked on the mailing list that are a >>> > result of new users trying to get to grips with the tooling and >>> > wandering down paths that lead to the same common errors, e.g. mixing >>> > different syntaxes together. >>> > >>> > If we can achieve this without losing any functionality or syntaxes >>> > then that seems ok, but the default and easiest exploration path >>> > should be limited to the chosen syntax (AAA). >>> > >>> > Perhaps this means moving all the classes relating to older syntaxes >>> > into a different namespace (Rhino.Mocks.Interop? probably a better >>> > name would be needed) so people can upgrade to 4.0 and keep everything >>> > the same by just adding a using to this namespace. Then in the main >>> > namespace (Rhino.Mocks) we keep as small a surface area so that a new >>> > user could pretty much get started just by using intellisense. >>> > >>> > When a user starts using the Interop namespace and getting it all >>> > mixed up leading to asking the questions (as I'm sure some will) we >>> > can say "The Interop namespace is designed only for backwards >>> > compatibility scenarios, please use the Rhino.Mocks.Fake class and >>> seehttp://ayende.com/wiki/Rhino+Mocks.ashxfor usage details" >>> > >>> > 2009/9/1 Tim Barcz <[email protected]>: >>> > >>> > > Do we need to kill backwards compatibility. I'm working on a >>> patch/spike >>> > > where the class Fake is used which really just calls MockRepository >>> under >>> > > the hood? >>> > >>> > > Thoughts? >>> > >>> > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 10:56 AM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > >> This is a blog post that would show up day after tomorrow, I am >>> posting it >>> > >> here to get some traction in the mailing list before we make it >>> really >>> > >> public. >>> > >>> > >> Well, now that Rhino Mocks 3.6 is out of the way, we need to think >>> about >>> > >> what the next version will look like. >>> > >>> > >> Initially, I thought to match Rhino Mocks 4.0 to the .NET 4.0 >>> release and >>> > >> support mocking dynamic variables, but while this is still on the >>> planning >>> > >> board, I think that it is much more important to stop and take a >>> look at >>> > >> where Rhino Mocks is now and where we would like it to be. >>> > >>> > >> I started Rhino Mocks about 5 years ago, and the codebase has stood >>> well >>> > >> in the test of time. There aren’t any nasty places and we can keep >>> releasing >>> > >> new features with no major issues. >>> > >>> > >> However, 5 years ago the community perception of mocking was >>> different >>> > >> than what it is now. Rhino Mocks hasn’t really changed significantly >>> since >>> > >> it 1.1 days, for that matter, you can take a code base using Rhino >>> Mocks for >>> > >> .Net 1.1 and move it to Rhino Mocks 3.6 with no issues. >>> > >>> > >> But one of the most frequent complaints that I have heard is that >>> Rhino >>> > >> Mocks API has became too complex over the years, there are too many >>> options >>> > >> and knobs that you can turn. I know that my own style of interaction >>> testing >>> > >> has changed as well. >>> > >>> > >> The current plan for Rhino Mocks 4.0 is that we will break backward >>> > >> compatibility in a big way. That means that we are going to >>> drastically >>> > >> simplify everything in the framework. >>> > >>> > >> We are still discussing this in the mailing list, but currently it >>> looks >>> > >> like we will go with the following route: >>> > >>> > >> Kill the dynamic, strict, partial and stub terminology. No one >>> cares. It >>> > >> is a fake. >>> > >> Remove the record / playback API. The AAA method is much simpler. >>> > >> Simplify mocking options, aiming at moving as much as possible from >>> > >> expectation style to assert style. >>> > >> Keep as much of the current capabilities as we can. That means that >>> if >>> > >> Rhino Mocks was able to support a scenario, it should still support >>> it for >>> > >> the 4.0 version, hopefully in a simpler fashion. >>> > >>> > >> The end result is putting Rhino Mocks on an API diet. I am looking >>> for >>> > >> help in doing this, both in terms of suggested syntax and in terms >>> of actual >>> > >> patches. >>> > >>> > >> You are welcome to contribute… >>> > >>> > > -- >>> > > Tim Barcz >>> > > Microsoft ASPInsider >>> > >http://timbarcz.devlicio.us >>> > >http://www.twitter.com/timbarcz >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Tim Barcz >> Microsoft ASPInsider >> http://timbarcz.devlicio.us >> http://www.twitter.com/timbarcz >> >> >> >> > > > > -- Tim Barcz Microsoft ASPInsider http://timbarcz.devlicio.us http://www.twitter.com/timbarcz --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Rhino.Mocks" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
