Mock Objects

> "Chad Nantais" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > Could someone please direct me to a Squeak project (or some
> > documentation) that uses mock objects in its tests, specifically
> > dealing with testing network code like a web service.  I'm looking for
> > a way to speed up some unit tests that hit a remote service.
>
> It's by no means fully functional, but you might want to look at
> MockSocketStream. That SHOULD be in Squeak-3.8 and up, seeing as I wrote it
> in 2004.
>
> Having a mock network layer not only lets you speed up tests, it also allows
> you to disregard all the lovely things that can go wrong in the network. You
> can run your tests knowing that you're not going to get red everywhere
> because your colleague tripped over your fly lead, or is fiddling with a
> patch panel in the next room. And, of course, a mock network layer lets you
> INJECT errors :)
>
> I do intend adding to the MockSocketStream at some stage, but my plate's too
> full for the next several months.
>
> frank
>
>
>

> While this mock layer is good for many applications, I think it's
> probably too deep for what Chad is dealing with.  Chad -- you should
> be able to mock out the service itself and inject that into your
> application code.  While I haven't done this in a Smalltalk
> application I have successfully and easily done it in *many*
> applications in other languages.
>
> Jason
>
> On 6/23/06, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > "Chad Nantais" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > Could someone please direct me to a Squeak project (or some
> > > documentation) that uses mock objects in its tests, specifically
> > > dealing with testing network code like a web service.  I'm looking for
> > > a way to speed up some unit tests that hit a remote service.
> >
> > It's by no means fully functional, but you might want to look at
> > MockSocketStream. That SHOULD be in Squeak-3.8 and up, seeing as I wrote it
> > in 2004.
> >
> > Having a mock network layer not only lets you speed up tests, it also allows
> > you to disregard all the lovely things that can go wrong in the network. You
> > can run your tests knowing that you're not going to get red everywhere
> > because your colleague tripped over your fly lead, or is fiddling with a
> > patch panel in the next room. And, of course, a mock network layer lets you
> > INJECT errors :)
> >
> > I do intend adding to the MockSocketStream at some stage, but my plate's too
> > full for the next several months.
> >
> > frank
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jason Rogers
>
> "Where there is no vision, the people perish..."
>     Proverbs 29:18
>
>

> Frank & Jason,
>
> I don't need anything too deep right now.  I just need to be able to
> create an object that mocks up a simple API for a remote service.
>
> I found this page and used it to create exactly what I needed.
> http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/userblogs/malby/SingleView.ssp?
> showComments=true&forPrinter=true&entry=3293316866
>
> I'm also using it to test non-networked code now too.  For example,
> when I am writing unit tests for Cart, and I want to test the
> Cart>>total, which adds prices of CartItem instances that are in the
> cart, I just mock up the CartItem instances and make them return some
> number when sent #price.  This is great because I can really isolate
> the Cart class that's being tested without it being dependant on
> having a fully-working CartItem class.
>
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Chad
>
> On 6/23/06, Jason Rogers <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> While this mock layer is good for many applications, I think it's
>> probably too deep for what Chad is dealing with.  Chad -- you should
>> be able to mock out the service itself and inject that into your
>> application code.  While I haven't done this in a Smalltalk
>> application I have successfully and easily done it in *many*
>> applications in other languages.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> On 6/23/06, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > "Chad Nantais" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi.
>> > >
>> > > Could someone please direct me to a Squeak project (or some
>> > > documentation) that uses mock objects in its tests, specifically
>> > > dealing with testing network code like a web service.  I'm  
>> looking for
>> > > a way to speed up some unit tests that hit a remote service.
>> >
>> > It's by no means fully functional, but you might want to look at
>> > MockSocketStream. That SHOULD be in Squeak-3.8 and up, seeing as  
>> I wrote it
>> > in 2004.
>> >
>> > Having a mock network layer not only lets you speed up tests, it  
>> also allows
>> > you to disregard all the lovely things that can go wrong in the  
>> network. You
>> > can run your tests knowing that you're not going to get red  
>> everywhere
>> > because your colleague tripped over your fly lead, or is  
>> fiddling with a
>> > patch panel in the next room. And, of course, a mock network  
>> layer lets you
>> > INJECT errors :)
>> >
>> > I do intend adding to the MockSocketStream at some stage, but my  
>> plate's too
>> > full for the next several months.
>> >
>> > frank
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Jason Rogers
>>
>> "Where there is no vision, the people perish..."
>>     Proverbs 29:18
>>
>>
>

> Stef,
>
> I have attached the MockObject code and a test example.
>
> Let me know if you are looking for something else.
>
> Chad
>
> On 6/26/06, stéphane ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Chad
>>
>> You know what would be great?
>> If you could write by pasting some of your code in a text editor and
>> share that with us.
>> I would like to add some material to my Sunit tutorial and I could
>> use your example.
>>
>> Stef
>>
>> On 23 juin 06, at 15:48, Chad Nantais wrote:
>>
>> > Frank & Jason,
>> >
>> > I don't need anything too deep right now.  I just need to be  
>> able to
>> > create an object that mocks up a simple API for a remote service.
>> >
>> > I found this page and used it to create exactly what I needed.
>> > http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/userblogs/malby/SingleView.ssp?
>> > showComments=true&forPrinter=true&entry=3293316866
>> >
>> > I'm also using it to test non-networked code now too.  For example,
>> > when I am writing unit tests for Cart, and I want to test the
>> > Cart>>total, which adds prices of CartItem instances that are in  
>> the
>> > cart, I just mock up the CartItem instances and make them return  
>> some
>> > number when sent #price.  This is great because I can really  
>> isolate
>> > the Cart class that's being tested without it being dependant on
>> > having a fully-working CartItem class.
>> >
>> > Thanks for your help.
>> >
>> > Chad
>> >
>> > On 6/23/06, Jason Rogers <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> While this mock layer is good for many applications, I think it's
>> >> probably too deep for what Chad is dealing with.  Chad -- you  
>> should
>> >> be able to mock out the service itself and inject that into your
>> >> application code.  While I haven't done this in a Smalltalk
>> >> application I have successfully and easily done it in *many*
>> >> applications in other languages.
>> >>
>> >> Jason
>> >>
>> >> On 6/23/06, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> > "Chad Nantais" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > Hi.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Could someone please direct me to a Squeak project (or some
>> >> > > documentation) that uses mock objects in its tests,  
>> specifically
>> >> > > dealing with testing network code like a web service.  I'm
>> >> looking for
>> >> > > a way to speed up some unit tests that hit a remote service.
>> >> >
>> >> > It's by no means fully functional, but you might want to look at
>> >> > MockSocketStream. That SHOULD be in Squeak-3.8 and up, seeing as
>> >> I wrote it
>> >> > in 2004.
>> >> >
>> >> > Having a mock network layer not only lets you speed up tests, it
>> >> also allows
>> >> > you to disregard all the lovely things that can go wrong in the
>> >> network. You
>> >> > can run your tests knowing that you're not going to get red
>> >> everywhere
>> >> > because your colleague tripped over your fly lead, or is
>> >> fiddling with a
>> >> > patch panel in the next room. And, of course, a mock network
>> >> layer lets you
>> >> > INJECT errors :)
>> >> >
>> >> > I do intend adding to the MockSocketStream at some stage, but my
>> >> plate's too
>> >> > full for the next several months.
>> >> >
>> >> > frank
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Jason Rogers
>> >>
>> >> "Where there is no vision, the people perish..."
>> >>     Proverbs 29:18
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> <Squeak MockObject.txt>
>> <Squeak MockObject - Cart Tests.txt>
>