Re: [Nmock-general] TypeMock vs. NMock

[<thi...@gm...>]

I agree with out on that point (benefits of mock objects + tdd to guide des=
ign)

Still with big bunches of legacy, poorly unit tested code, it's helpful...

I'm a bit afraid of the "typemock" concept also : mocking all the
instances of a given type... I'm more comfortable with the dynamic
mock approach (so far).

2005/4/21, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...>:
> Without any intrusion, how will it guide design?
>=20
> --Nat.
>=20
> On 4/21/05, Dean Hiller <dea...@bo...> wrote:
> > Very interesting.  Hibernate does the same thing(and I assume NHibernat=
e also).  In practice, you never even notice the intrusion.  You write plai=
n old java beans and you can get rid of Hibernate at will because of that. =
 It is quite nice.  I am thinking the route TypeMock took may be nice also =
as I don't see the intrusion therefore it doesn't exist :).  Well, it exist=
s, but I am not sure it bothers me as long as it is stable.  If it was unst=
able, it might be a bit harder to debug the problem which I wouldn't like.
> > dean
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thibaut Barr=E8re [mailto:thi...@gm...]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2005 7:16 AM
> > To: Steve Freeman
> > Cc: Steve Baker; Dean Hiller; <nmo...@li...>; Na=
t Pryce
> > Subject: Re: [Nmock-general] TypeMock vs. NMock
> >
> > A small note on TypeMock; after reading a few docs, it seems that the
> > approach (at least for real typemocks) is quite different : it seems
> > to be instrumenting the IL (this allow more things without redesigning
> > at all, but is also more instrusive IMHO).
> >
> > any other opinion ?
> >
> > 2005/4/20, Steve Freeman <st...@m3...>:
> > > On 19 Apr 2005, at 21:28, Steve Baker wrote:
> > > > Yeah, it is a rather dead mailing list :(
> > > >
> > > > I use NMock, never looked at TypeMock though.
> > > >
> > > > Nmock has almost always had everything I needed. We even use it to
> > > > Mock out our SqlHelper class (slightly modified from DAAB) so that =
our
> > > > tests never hit a database. It is quick and easy :)
> > >
> > > Not dead, just not very active :) largely because no-one has been
> > > asking for stuff. That said, Nat has started work on porting our jMoc=
k
> > > experience to C# and has come up with some very nice constructs.
> > > Unfortunately, his day job seems to keep getting in the way :) Watch
> > > this space.
> > >
> > > S.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments hereto are=
 for the exclusive use of the addressee and may contain confidential, privi=
leged and nondisclosable information. If the recipient of this e-mail is no=
t the addressee, or a person responsible for delivering this e-mail to the =
addressee, such recipient is strictly prohibited from reading, printing, ph=
otocopying, distributing or otherwise using this e-mail or any attachments =
hereto in any way. If the recipient has received this e-mail in error, plea=
se send return e-mail immediately notifying us of your receipt of this e-ma=
il and delete the e-mail from your inbox. Thank you.
> >
>