Re: [Mockobjects-java-users] EasyMock vs. MockObjects

[Lucas F. <lu...@ha...>]

Thank you Vincent & Steve for your answers! I see your points. 
Especially the standard API mocks! Are there more than the ones in
mockobjects.jar? (some /io, /servlet, /sql as far as I remember).
Are there already some more somewhere? Tim told me at XP2001 that he/you have
already mocked javamail. Is that available?

Another point I see is that in using EasyMock there rests some 'kind of magic',
whereas the real mocks are simple and everything is there to inspect. Maybe
easier for a newcomer too.

Of course, convergence of the two (dynamic / static) in naming and usage would
be fine, as it would give me freedom using both in the same project. (I would
not dare now.)

> The idea of the Mock Objects project is twofold : provide a core framework
> of expectations and useful classes for writing mock implementations (This
> framework is actually used by MockMaker to generate mock objects and it
> could be used by EasyMock too) 

why isn't that the case? Has somebody talked to EasyMock-Tammo Freese already?


Steve:
> That said, there are now several tools based around mock objects and it
> seems like it would be a good idea to attempt some convergence. Any
> offers?

you mean founding the MOMG ?

What I can offer is 'opening the discussion'.


By the.s way, what in detail needs to be done for the open task:

> Write a common coding and naming convention (for example names
> of mock initialization methods like setupAddParameter(), name of methods 
> for setting expectations, ...) and reformat all the existing code.

Sounds like there are naming inconsistencies in mockobjects.jar.
Is there a list of the methods needing proper naming?


Nice weekend,

	Lucas



  Lucas Filz
  A-1140 Vienna
  +43.1.577 1 899