Re: [MO-java-dev] ExpectationValue.getActual(), activity?

[Dmitri C. <col...@gm...>]

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the feedback, criticism always welcome.  I hope you don't
mind me asking a few points though.

> - the jdbc API is all interfaces, so I'd still suggest using jmock
> because it's easier to work with

I'm not sure how this would change the structure of the test.  I'd
still be doing much the same as I am now yeah?

> - yes, the jmock library is largely about mocking your own interfaces,
> but there's a reason for that. The intention is to drive the design. At
> first glance, it looks like your code would benefit from being broken
> up into smaller objects, which can be tested individually. MO tests
> should be focussed and readable.

Yeah fair call, I've extracted the method out into a method object to
facilitate this, thanks for the heads up.  As an excuse I'm going to
state that I've just returned from a month long holiday (o:

> - if you want to test at this level, then it's more like a little
> integration test. Frankly, I'd think seriously about having little
> database and container instances to run against.

Yep, know what you're saying.  But I also wanted to do something
test-driven, and was stuck trying to think of where I should put a
test that made me write the code.

> - What's all this mock container and aspect weaving about? If you want
> to use mocks, then write a domain layer that fits just insider the
> container and test that independently. Then all the container does is
> assemble the pieces and pass them through to the domain layer.

I have no idea (o:  I just copied that from http://www.mockejb.org,
most of the setup method is from there.

> - Also consider a domain layer to manage persistence. This can be
> mocked out when testing the domain application code, and its real DB
> implementation tested separately.

Yeah, fighting that battle elsewhere (o:

cheers
dim