I find that to be able to unit test things in golang, I need to restructure
them in an uncomfortable way in order to be able to mock their dependencies.
For example, say I want to test this simple http handler:
func handleLogIn(w http.ResponseWriter, r *http.Request) {
svc := pkg.NewExternalService()
value1 := parseValue1(r)
svc.CallThis(value1)
value2 := parseValue2(r)
svc.CallThat(value2)
}
I want to mock pkg.NewExternalService, then use httptest to make sure given
a http.Request, svc will be called with the correctly values.
Right now, the solution I can come up with:
1. create a closure to create the service instead:
var newExternalService = func () Service {
return pkg.NewExternalService()
}
2. override it in test:
newExternalService = func () Service {
return &MockService{}
}
Notice how I'm forced to use a closure instead of a function declaration.
And then I have to turn Service into an interface so I can return a mock in
test. But that's not the end of it. If I ever need to access a field of
Service, I'm screwed, because interfaces can't contain fields. So I also
have to restructure Service to expose fields as methods.
I feel catering to the ability to be tested has too big an impact on my
original code, and if I have no control over the design for the original
Service, it seems it will be very difficult to test to say the least.
I wonder if there is a better solution?
Regards,
Glen
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"golang-nuts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
