Re: [Nmock-general] TypeMock vs. NMock

[Steve F. <st...@m3...>]

It's hard to tell, since their website reveals so little about them,=20
but I think this is the same team that did something in Java a few=20
years ago. A clue is that they don't refer to anyone else's work in=20
this area.

One view is that they're addressing a different problem from us, but=20
with the usual confusion over names. On the other hand, as Nat points=20
out, they've missed our point about driving a design. On another hand,=20=

so many of the .Net libraries are so badly designed that tools like=20
this may really be necessary.

S.

On 21 Apr 2005, at 17:12, Thibaut Barr=E8re wrote:
> I agree with out on that point (benefits of mock objects + tdd to=20
> guide design)
>
> Still with big bunches of legacy, poorly unit tested code, it's=20
> 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).