On Oct 18, 2008, at 10:30 AM, Stephen Eley wrote:
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 12:53 AM, Scott Taylor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
In Javascript, it might look more or less like this:
var old_method = obj[my_method];
my_obj[my_method] = my_return_value;
That's an interesting syntax comparison, thanks, but not really what I
was reacting to. The statement of import (with emphasis added) was
""The dynamic nature of JavaScript makes mocking frameworks MOSTLY
UNNECESSARY."
This doesn't imply a simpler mocking framework, as you describe. It
implies a fundamental mindshift in how testing gets done.
AH - that's interesting. I didn't take it as any sort of mindshift in
testing. I thought that README/blogpost was simply saying that a mock
framework is unnecessary because the syntax is so easy. But only
*mostly* unnecessary, because either 1) there will be times where
you'll need to tear things down, AND/OR 2) You could build a tiny stub/
mock framework around this stuff very easily for small syntactical
gains.
Interesting idea, though, and maybe it does cause a mindshift in
testing.
Scott
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
