Originally posted by Frank Carver:
I think you need to be careful with assuming that "mock objects" is the same as "test data" or "dummy objects", or whetever you have used before.
Mock objects used for testing have a few significant features rarely found in simpler dummy-data objects. A good mock object is designed from the ground up to enable behaviour to be tested, not just data values. Often this is done by preloading return values and/or by counting or asserting in method calls.
Reid - SCJP2 (April 2002)
I would say no. Mock Objects is a technique for low-level testing -- the kind that unit tests generally are. I would assume that this Test Team would be more involved in functional testing (acceptance testing, integration testing, system testing, or whatever the project vocabulary calls it), right?Originally posted by HS Thomas:
I am asking do Test Teams (including User Acceptance) use Mock Objects as a replacement for data scripts ?
Author of Test Driven (2007) and Effective Unit Testing (2013) [Blog] [HowToAskQuestionsOnJavaRanch]
Originally posted by Lasse Koskela:
I would assume that this Test Team would be more involved in functional testing (acceptance testing, integration testing, system testing, or whatever the project vocabulary calls it), right?
Reid - SCJP2 (April 2002)
The soul is dyed the color of its thoughts. Think only on those things that are in line with your principles and can bear the light of day. The content of your character is your choice. Day by day, what you do is who you become. Your integrity is your destiny - it is the light that guides your way. - Heraclitus
Originally posted by HS Thomas:
Would this work in a non XP environment ?
The soul is dyed the color of its thoughts. Think only on those things that are in line with your principles and can bear the light of day. The content of your character is your choice. Day by day, what you do is who you become. Your integrity is your destiny - it is the light that guides your way. - Heraclitus
Originally posted by Christian Hargraves:
Using something like FIT is much easier to get started in, but Jameleon attempts to make things more reusable and more immune to changes to the application.
It also attempts to solve the documentation problems that come with automating tests.
I am planning on writing a white paper about the ideas behind Jameleon.
The soul is dyed the color of its thoughts. Think only on those things that are in line with your principles and can bear the light of day. The content of your character is your choice. Day by day, what you do is who you become. Your integrity is your destiny - it is the light that guides your way. - Heraclitus
I am still not convinced by this. In FIT, the fixtures present a quite valuable abstraction from the interface of the application, so I'd think that it could be made as immune to changes. And reusability can be achieved by using reusable pages in FitNesse, so it seems to me?
On the other hand, the documentation effect of FitNesse might suffice for many projects.
I would really like to read that paper...
Consider Paul's rocket mass heater. |