On 1/24/09 5:02 AM, voodoorai2000 wrote:
In conclusion, when not to use cucumber? never. Always use cucumber,
everyone always use cucumber, lets find this hard problems to re-use steps
and tackle them together, find a solution and move on to the next
road-blocker. Use Rspec but as the underlying language to make cucumber
work, not to divide your application into model view controller specs,
separate your tests into user and developer features/steps.
Distributed testing is a must to use cucumber effectively, and the use of
mocks is also unrefutable[1], but only as an alternative to an inability to
test something in a classical way[2]
Rai
[1]http://rubyconf2008.confreaks.com/testing-heresies.html
[2]http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html
Well, I have learned never to say never. ;) As far as the mocking
goes... I always use real objects in features unless I need to make an
external network call to another system (i.e. a web services call, in
which case I like to use fakeweb[1]). That said, one of the things I
really like about having features is that it allows me to use mock
objects in my object level examples without any fear of integration
point failures. I find it very hard to test objects under total
isolation without using mocks to remove dependencies and I gain a lot of
design benefit from using mocks. I really don't want to get into the
whole classic vs mockist debate though as it was just beat to death on
the TDD mailing list.[2] :)
-Ben
[1] http://github.com/chrisk/fakeweb/tree/master
[2] http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/testdrivendevelopment/message/29674
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
