Comments on: Using Synthesis with Test::Unit and Mocha http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/ nutrun Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:12:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: George Malamidis http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-1157 George Malamidis Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:50:51 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-1157 Hey Nic, Synthesis has come a long way since this post and supports both Mocha and RSpec now. Hey Nic, Synthesis has come a long way since this post and supports both Mocha and RSpec now.

]]> By: Dr Nic http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-1155 Dr Nic Mon, 18 Aug 2008 01:11:58 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-1155 This is something I dearly wanted when I was playing with rspec a year ago. My specs would pass but my app would fail because i mocked out things that didn't exist. (I didn't experience the problem as much using test/unit + mocha because I found I didn't mock out as much stuff, so less opportunity to forget to code behind the mock). This is something I dearly wanted when I was playing with rspec a year ago. My specs would pass but my app would fail because i mocked out things that didn’t exist. (I didn’t experience the problem as much using test/unit + mocha because I found I didn’t mock out as much stuff, so less opportunity to forget to code behind the mock).

]]> By: Nutrun » Blog Archive » Synthesis 0.0.2 http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-324 Nutrun » Blog Archive » Synthesis 0.0.2 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 01:43:35 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-324 [...] Let’s revisit the example project from the Using Synthesis with Test::Unit and Mocha article and change the save method of the Storage class to take an additional argument - mode. [...] [...] Let’s revisit the example project from the Using Synthesis with Test::Unit and Mocha article and change the save method of the Storage class to take an additional argument - mode. [...]

]]> By: George Malamidis http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-323 George Malamidis Mon, 14 Jan 2008 23:52:50 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-323 As of version 0.0.2, Synthesis will fail for the discussed scenario. As of version 0.0.2, Synthesis will fail for the discussed scenario.

]]> By: Stuart Caborn http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-322 Stuart Caborn Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:18:31 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-322 Pat: I agree that you do need integration tests at some level. However with a tool like this, could we rely on the business level acceptance tests only? We (should) always have story level tests to prove that our behaviour is useful. There also often seems to be an accretion of functional tests who's purpose seems to be to prove that the unit tests all join up. If we can prove this automagically, then we can do away with these tests? Pat:

I agree that you do need integration tests at some level. However with a tool like this, could we rely on the business level acceptance tests only?

We (should) always have story level tests to prove that our behaviour is useful. There also often seems to be an accretion of functional tests who’s purpose seems to be to prove that the unit tests all join up. If we can prove this automagically, then we can do away with these tests?

]]> By: Pat Maddox http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-321 Pat Maddox Sun, 13 Jan 2008 01:40:42 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-321 Oh totally. It isn't a problem with Synthesis anymore than it is a problem with using mocks in general. It just seems like at *some* level you have to have integration tests. Oh totally. It isn’t a problem with Synthesis anymore than it is a problem with using mocks in general.

It just seems like at *some* level you have to have integration tests.

]]> By: George Malamidis http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-320 George Malamidis Sun, 13 Jan 2008 01:24:56 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-320 Pat, Sorry, I deleted my initial response when I realized what the problem you were describing was, intending to reply with this... I know what you mean, now. This is a Mocha issue, rather than a Synthesis issue. As you probably know, Mocha mocks are ducks. There's Mocha::Mock#responds_like, but it won't solve the problem you're describing. In the long run, we might end up with a stricter Mocking framework, which, as you're saying, will have to tap into the methods of the actual Objects being mocked, as opposed to ducking them. Thanks for bringing this up. Pat,

Sorry, I deleted my initial response when I realized what the problem you were describing was, intending to reply with this…

I know what you mean, now.

This is a Mocha issue, rather than a Synthesis issue. As you probably know, Mocha mocks are ducks. There’s Mocha::Mock#responds_like, but it won’t solve the problem you’re describing.

In the long run, we might end up with a stricter Mocking framework, which, as you’re saying, will have to tap into the methods of the actual Objects being mocked, as opposed to ducking them.

Thanks for bringing this up.

]]> By: Pat Maddox http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-319 Pat Maddox Sun, 13 Jan 2008 01:21:59 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-319 Hey George, No, data_brander_test.rb doesn't break, which was my point. I just changed storage.rb and storage_test.rb accordingly. http://rafb.net/p/HBuzye66.html So all the tests pass, even though the two components can't be used together. I've thought about stuff like this in the past. I have a tough time seeing how you'd make this work without using the real implementation. Hey George,

No, data_brander_test.rb doesn’t break, which was my point.

I just changed storage.rb and storage_test.rb accordingly.

http://rafb.net/p/HBuzye66.html

So all the tests pass, even though the two components can’t be used together.

I’ve thought about stuff like this in the past. I have a tough time seeing how you’d make this work without using the real implementation.

]]> By: Nutrun » Blog Archive » Using Synthesis with Expectations http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-318 Nutrun » Blog Archive » Using Synthesis with Expectations Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:42:52 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-318 [...] « Using Synthesis with Test::Unit and Mocha [...] [...] « Using Synthesis with Test::Unit and Mocha [...]

]]> By: Pat Maddox http://nutrun.com/weblog/using-synthesis-with-testunit-and-mocha/#comment-317 Pat Maddox Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:26:46 +0000 http://new-site.nutrun.com/?p=117#comment-317 Looks cool. I played with it briefly just to check something out... If you change the signature of Storage#save to be Storage#save(filename, mode), and update storage_test.rb accordingly, then Synthesis passes, even though the code is now broken. I realize you said this is a prototype so I don't want to jump the gun :) How do you plan on handling that sort of case? Thanks for posting this though, it looks like a step in the right direction. Looks cool. I played with it briefly just to check something out…

If you change the signature of Storage#save to be Storage#save(filename, mode), and update storage_test.rb accordingly, then Synthesis passes, even though the code is now broken.

I realize you said this is a prototype so I don’t want to jump the gun :) How do you plan on handling that sort of case?

Thanks for posting this though, it looks like a step in the right direction.

]]>