> > But if you have to make setPropertiesFileName public, or to make design
> > choices for the component based on the testing framework requirements -
> > no, I don't think that's good. If the component has a
> > setPropertiesFileName it is because that's the intended behavior.
> >
>
> How would
Interesting ... Let me try one more time ... :)
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 10:43 PM
Subject: Re: Servlet Unit Testing strategies
>
> > 2) For any test framework that you use, you may ha
> 2) For any test framework that you use, you may have to modify your own
> class to help testing it ... but this is not bad, this usually brings a
> better design ... For example : let's say you have a class that uses a
> Properties file to read some data. Let's imagine you want to test your cla
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: Servlet Unit Testing strategies
> > Hi Tomcat developers,
> >
> > I'd like to have your opinion on servlet unit testing. I hav
> Hi Tomcat developers,
>
> I'd like to have your opinion on servlet unit testing. I have written a
> simple extension to JUnit called J2EEUnit to do that but I'd like to knwo if
> there is a general consensus on servlet unit testing, regarding it's
> usefulness :
>
> Do you think :
>
> 1) It i
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, February 23, 2001 2:29 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Servlet Unit Testing strategies
>
>
> Hi Tomcat developers,
>
> I'd like to have your opinion on servlet unit testing. I have
> written a
> simple extension to
Hi Tomcat developers,
I'd like to have your opinion on servlet unit testing. I have written a
simple extension to JUnit called J2EEUnit to do that but I'd like to knwo if
there is a general consensus on servlet unit testing, regarding it's
usefulness :
Do you think :
1) It is useless. Just need
