Good man (without meaning to sound as patronising as it does!) I'm actually quite shocked by the number of APIs released into the public domain where all sorts of general "best practices" are completely ignored.
Anyhow ... I trust that the Stubbing stuff makes perfect sense :o) On Nov 24, 1:46 pm, Gary <[email protected]> wrote: > bill richards wrote: > > the "Law of Demeter" says that a client of an object should not know > > about the internals of the object; and therefore in the example, the > > client should not know that Foo is actually a property of > > MyInnerClass. > > > I hope that makes sense ... > > > However, in order to address your question with regards to how to mock > > this stuff (prior to modifying your implementation, should you choose > > to do so) > > I already refactored it, despite not having unit tests to be sure I > didn't screw things up. Sadly the stuff I needed to mock is from an API, > and the specified way to use it *is* to have the client access those > internal properties directly. It doesn't stop me wrapping it though, > which is what I did. > > -- > Gary Please do NOT send me 'courtesy' replies off-list. -- 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.
