I totally agree with you, David! For quite a while I was testing all my methods (even had to declare them protected/package scope in java!), but I realized that I was getting into a lot of trouble. Now I've shifted to testing functionality in stead of methods.
Now, sometimes you might end up having small methods (typically a result of refactoring) that are being used by several clients. In that case you should start testing those methods, since they actually represent real business logic. I talked to uncle Bob about this issue just a few months ago, and as far as I understood, he uses a similar approach. I think it might make sense to think of the facade pattern when you do your testing - do you really care what happens behind the facade? Stefan 2008/1/9, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Jan 8, 2008 1:25 PM, Matt Patterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You should check out the bowling kata > (http://butunclebob.com/ArticleS.UncleBob.TheBowlingGameKata) if you > haven't. At the end there are just a few tests and they all touch only > 2 public methods, but there are many, many smaller methods that appear > through refactoring. They are all thoroughly tested, though not > directly. > > Cheers, > David > ______________ -- Bekk Open Source http://boss.bekk.no
_______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
