Unit Tests & Integration Tests

[Andrew Wilkins]

On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Gustavo Niemeyer <gustavo at niemeyer.net>
wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:42 PM, Andrew Wilkins
> <andrew.wilkins at canonical.com> wrote:
> > I basically agree with everything below, but strongly disagree that
> mocking
> > implies you know exactly what the code is doing internally. A good
> interface
>
> I'm also in agreement about your points. But just so you understand
> where Roger is coming from, the term "mocking" is often [1] associated
> with a test style that does bind very closely to what the code does.
> But you're probably using the term more loosely for test doubles in
> general, and I'm all for not being pedantic, so yes, +1 to the
> intention of what you've said.
>
> [1] http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html


Thanks Gustavo, I was indeed abusing the term.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju-dev/attachments/20140912/773897aa/attachment.html>