mockobjects-java-dev

RE: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?

[Ayerst, T. <Tom...@DR...>]

	Proxy
        |
    +---+---+
    |       |
   Moxy    Boxy

? :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Walnes [mailto:jo...@tr...]
Sent: 12 May 2003 06:51
To: Steve Freeman
Cc: Tim Mackinnon; Vincent Massol; 'Mockobjects-Java-Dev'
Subject: Re: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?


Steve Freeman wrote:

> another thing, after all that naming stuff last week. The getter in 
> the .Net version is called MockInstance(), which seems to describe the 
> situation quite adequately. 

I prefer MockInstance because it doesnt tie the api into the fact that 
the mock object is generated using a dynamic proxy. For example, the 
enhancements I made to allow classes (as well as interfaces) to be 
mocked used byte code generation instead of a proxy. That's also another 
reason not to call it Moxy.

-j




-------------------------------------------------------
Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara
The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solutions
www.enterpriselinuxforum.com

_______________________________________________
Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
Moc...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev


----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail 
disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to 
http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?

[Vincent M. <vm...@pi...>]

I personally like DynaMock as it really has a nice ring and it still
reminds us that we're talking about Mocks. I wouldn't care about the
fact that "Dyna" looks like "Dynamic Proxy". For me "Dyna" simply means
dynamic, which is more positive than static and suggests that we're
doing stuff at runtime versus compile time.

My 0.2=88
-Vincent

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ayerst, Tom [mailto:Tom...@DR...]
> Sent: 12 May 2003 09:01
> To: 'Joe Walnes'; Steve Freeman
> Cc: Tim Mackinnon; Vincent Massol; 'Mockobjects-Java-Dev'
> Subject: RE: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?
>=20
> 	Proxy
>         |
>     +---+---+
>     |       |
>    Moxy    Boxy
>=20
> ? :-)
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Walnes [mailto:jo...@tr...]
> Sent: 12 May 2003 06:51
> To: Steve Freeman
> Cc: Tim Mackinnon; Vincent Massol; 'Mockobjects-Java-Dev'
> Subject: Re: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?
>=20
>=20
> Steve Freeman wrote:
>=20
> > another thing, after all that naming stuff last week. The getter in
> > the .Net version is called MockInstance(), which seems to describe
the
> > situation quite adequately.
>=20
> I prefer MockInstance because it doesnt tie the api into the fact that
> the mock object is generated using a dynamic proxy. For example, the
> enhancements I made to allow classes (as well as interfaces) to be
> mocked used byte code generation instead of a proxy. That's also
another
> reason not to call it Moxy.
>=20
> -j
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara
> The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise
solutions
> www.enterpriselinuxforum.com
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> Moc...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev
>=20
>=20
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail
> disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to
> http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?

[Jeff M. <je...@mk...>]

Personally I think DynaMock is really cheesy. I'd prefer the more mature
Dynamic Mock. Does that make me boring?

Actually what about Mynamic ;)=20

On Mon, 2003-05-12 at 08:25, Vincent Massol wrote:
> I personally like DynaMock as it really has a nice ring and it still
> reminds us that we're talking about Mocks. I wouldn't care about the
> fact that "Dyna" looks like "Dynamic Proxy". For me "Dyna" simply means
> dynamic, which is more positive than static and suggests that we're
> doing stuff at runtime versus compile time.
>=20
> My 0.2=E2=82=AC
> -Vincent
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ayerst, Tom [mailto:Tom...@DR...]
> > Sent: 12 May 2003 09:01
> > To: 'Joe Walnes'; Steve Freeman
> > Cc: Tim Mackinnon; Vincent Massol; 'Mockobjects-Java-Dev'
> > Subject: RE: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?
> >=20
> > 	Proxy
> >         |
> >     +---+---+
> >     |       |
> >    Moxy    Boxy
> >=20
> > ? :-)
> >=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joe Walnes [mailto:jo...@tr...]
> > Sent: 12 May 2003 06:51
> > To: Steve Freeman
> > Cc: Tim Mackinnon; Vincent Massol; 'Mockobjects-Java-Dev'
> > Subject: Re: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?
> >=20
> >=20
> > Steve Freeman wrote:
> >=20
> > > another thing, after all that naming stuff last week. The getter in
> > > the .Net version is called MockInstance(), which seems to describe
> the
> > > situation quite adequately.
> >=20
> > I prefer MockInstance because it doesnt tie the api into the fact tha=
t
> > the mock object is generated using a dynamic proxy. For example, the
> > enhancements I made to allow classes (as well as interfaces) to be
> > mocked used byte code generation instead of a proxy. That's also
> another
> > reason not to call it Moxy.
> >=20
> > -j
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara
> > The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise
> solutions
> > www.enterpriselinuxforum.com
> >=20
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> > Moc...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev
> >=20
> >=20
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
> > If you have received this e-mail in error or wish to read our e-mail
> > disclaimer statement and monitoring policy, please refer to
> > http://www.drkw.com/disc/email/ or contact the sender.
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------=
-
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo, June 4-6, 2003, Santa Clara
> The only event dedicated to issues related to Linux enterprise solution=
s
> www.enterpriselinuxforum.com
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> Mockobjects-java-dev mailing list
> Moc...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mockobjects-java-dev
--=20
------------------------------
jeff martin
information technologist
mkodo limited

mobile: 44 (0) 78 55 478 331
phone: 44 (0) 20 77 29 45 45
email: jef...@mk...

www.mkodo.com

73 Leonard St, London, EC2A 4QS. U.K

Re: [MO-java-dev] New dyna mocks to head?

[Joe W. <jo...@tr...>]

I like the name DynaMock too.

Or MegaMock. Or GreatSmashingSuperMock.

Jeff Martin wrote:

>Personally I think DynaMock is really cheesy. I'd prefer the more mature
>Dynamic Mock. Does that make me boring?
>
>Actually what about Mynamic ;) 
>
>On Mon, 2003-05-12 at 08:25, Vincent Massol wrote:
>  
>
>>I personally like DynaMock as it really has a nice ring and it still
>>reminds us that we're talking about Mocks. I wouldn't care about the
>>fact that "Dyna" looks like "Dynamic Proxy". For me "Dyna" simply means
>>dynamic, which is more positive than static and suggests that we're
>>doing stuff at runtime versus compile time.
>>
>>    
>>