Comments on: TDD: Only mock types you own

By: WYTIWYR : What You Test Is What You Run « Antonio's Blog

WYTIWYR : What You Test Is What You Run « Antonio's Blog — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 14:58:22 +0000

[...] EE and you had to do many different tricks. That’s why we used extensively unit testing and mocked even objects that we don’t owe (like the EntityManager). But since Java EE 6, thanks to all our container factories [...]

By: Episode 7 – Survivors | Marcelo Costa

Episode 7 – Survivors | Marcelo Costa — Wed, 28 Apr 2010 03:23:24 +0000

[...] then talk about “Only mock types you own”, as interpreted by Liz Douglas and Mark Needham (the article they refer to is “Mock Roles, Not Objects”). And we end the show on time (like [...]

By: TypeMock gets it wrong on ORM « On the Heap

TypeMock gets it wrong on ORM « On the Heap — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 20:48:00 +0000

[...] TypeMock gets it wrong on ORM Posted January 5, 2010 Filed under: Uncategorized | The fellas at TypeMock recently discussed “Mocking only what you own” in response to a cogent though not very helpful post from normally lucid author Mark Needham. [...]

By: Gil Zilberfeld

Gil Zilberfeld — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:09:14 +0000

Hi Mark, In our latest installment of our webcast This week in testing, we talked about your (and Liz's) post. I invite you to check it out, comment and if you really like what you see, and want to see more, spread the word. Gil Zilberfeld, Typemock

By: Rogério Liesenfeld

Rogério Liesenfeld — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:08:41 +0000

I am with “mike” on this.

If you are writing integration tests, then let them use the real thing (Hibernate in this case) and hit the database.

In unit tests, OTOH, I would always directly mock the library (the EntityManager interface). All Java libraries are mockable, so there is no need to wrap any of them.

The true “world of pain” is having to create (and maintain) a lot of extra production code with no business or technical value, when you could write simple and direct tests instead.

By: Simon Harris

Simon Harris — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 23:49:10 +0000

Reminds me of another post I wrote back in 2003 http://www.harukizaemon.com/2003/11/don-mock-infrastructure.html. This is getting spooky

By: msuarz

msuarz — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:06:09 +0000

I’m not with this 100% … I always have two levels of tests … acceptance n’ unit … the acceptance test uses the real thing, unit mocks everything …

If the library I’m using allows mocking I’ll mock it … If not I’ll wrap it with a interface + class or just with a virtual function + partial mock

But in any case … the acceptance test is the one that would do the integration part … so i don’t see the big deal with this

cheers
mike

By: Tweets that mention TDD: Only mock types you own at Mark Needham -- Topsy.com

Tweets that mention TDD: Only mock types you own at Mark Needham -- Topsy.com — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 12:29:47 +0000

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Mark Needham, aDevilInMe. aDevilInMe said: Some people may disagree but do they know what a mock is? RT @markhneedham: thoughts on mocking types … – http://bit.ly/8RHGk1 [...]