I think you'll end up creating mock objects for everything including
transaction, security, simulating ejbLoad calls, simulating jndi access
and so on. I don't think that's a good idea due to EJB's complexity. But
if you write your EJB in a way that has minimum or no dependency to EJB
then that's fine. I mean if you could write a bean consisting of pure
business logic and hide anything else in subclasses (one generated for
ejb deployment, the other acting as a mock for containerless scenario).

Ara.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:xdoclet-devel-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Vincent Harcq
> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2002 4:22 AM
> To: Devel XDoclet
> Subject: [Xdoclet-devel] Junit on Entity bean
> 
> Hi,
> I just commit sth that permit to specify in build (and not in sources)
> the cmp version to use.
> 
> The idea is that I will generate CMP 1.1 classes for samples, then I
> will be able to instantiate, say CustomerCMP, sets some fields on it
> calls getData() and see if super classes attributes were set, etc...
> Next step would be to create a hack ou Util classes that do'nt go to
> JNDI but return a fake implementation of Home, this one in turn will
> return fake implementations of remote/local interface that operates on
> instances of the CMP class directly.
> The persistence of data, would be made into a file (Serialization?) or
> sth (no not a database : I want this quick, simple, in a word XP!)
> The unit test would need to create() data (SetUp) before being able to
> "finder" the bean.  (tearDown would remove() so delete my tmp files)
> ejbLoad, ejbStore,... Would be called when needed (more thinking here)
> 
> That makes a long time I was thinking of unit testing EJBs outside a
> container : Application level unit testing
> The idea is "I am testing MY beans, I don't care about testing
container
> responsabilities (transaction,...).  The DD ?  I know they are good:
> they comes from xdoclet ;)"
> 
> For unit testing ejb inside a container other tools exists and are
> necessary as well but are complementary, more low level : transaction,
> performance, ...
> 
> This will of course also permit to unit test what xdoclet generates
> (from samples or enhanced ones...)
> 
> What do you think ? I am a bit tired, I maybe miss a point.
> Do you know anywhere I can find something similar to this.
> 
> Going to bed,
> Vincent
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xdoclet-devel mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com


_______________________________________________
Xdoclet-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xdoclet-devel

Reply via email to