Art of Unit Testing

[phil hunt]

On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 10:19:05 +0200, Christoph Zwerschke <cito at online.de> wrote:
>rafi wrote:
>> 'should' may be too strong, 'may' may be better. In the meantime I found:
>>     http://python-mock.sourceforge.net/
>
>Thanks for the link. Björn also pointed to http://pmock.sourceforge.net
>
>Using mock objects sounds like a good idea.
>
>A problem with mock objects may be that they make writing tests for the 
>occasional programmer yet another bit more difficult, and that you 
>always have to ensure your mock objects really mock the real objects 
>perfectly, so you have to write another test for that. The behavior and 
>the API of the real objects may change every now and then.
>
>Let me summarize some good answers in this thread:
>
>- unittest is deliberately intended to be a JUnit implementation
>- unittest is for *unit* testing (only) ;-)

I use regression testing (using my "lintest" module, which is 
functionally similar to unittest) on the whole application. I really 
see no reason why the concept should be limited to testing 
individual modules (or roughly similar-sized pieces).

-- 
Email: zen19725 at zen dot co dot uk