RE: Pico Container ideas are not new- January 25, 2004 patrah says: "Pico Container ideas are not new." Unfortunately, (s)he doesnt't mention what of the ideas are not new. (There is just "the idea"). The only thing that the authors of PicoContainer might have claimed as newness is to have a framework that supports constructor based dependency injection. As far as I can tell, there is no prior art to that. And for the IoC stuff: We never claimed it to be our invention (there are heaps of pre-pico IoC frameworks of course); We just came up with an.http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/rinkrank/archives/000576_re_pico_container_ideas_are_not_... Static or Dynamic Mock: A brief comparison.- January 21, 2004 Crazybob is Mocking. It struck me that his tests could have been even shorter and IMO more readable had he used a mock library based on dynamic proxies (like JMock). The static way (Bob's example with minor corrections): Lines of code in the body: 10 Number of characters in the body (minus leading indentation whitespace): 274 (Not counting the MockServletConfig baseclass, which also has to be coded). public void testGetInitParameterWithStaticcMock() final String.http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/rinkrank/archives/000565_static_or_dynamic_mock_a_brief_c... Injection Dependency- January 14, 2004 Jon: Carlos Villela tells me that Dependency means "Addiction" in Portuguese. Aslak: Perhaps Fowler's new pattern name is a bit unfortunate then. Haha. Jon: Nah. Pass me the needle.http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/rinkrank/archives/000555_injection_dependency.html Oh no, we're testing the Mock!- January 12, 2004 Recently I have been working on a team where a misunderstood mocking practice is common. (It's really an antipattern). Before I delve into the details, let me recap some simple mock essentials. A mock is an object that acts as a "dummy" placeholder for a "real" object. Its class is generally an implementation of an interface or a subclass of some class, either generated dynamically or statically coded. For a detailed explanation of what Mocks are and what they are intended to do, see...http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/rinkrank/archives/000551_oh_no_were_testing_the_mock.html RE: Enough with the Test Driven Development Hype- January 1, 2004 Paul is tired of the "TDD hype". He as many others seem to have misunderstood what it's all about. (TDD is not a testing technique). He also seems to ignore the benefits of TDD. "You'll spend more time writing tests than code." While in some cases this is true, or close to true, it is not a bad thing. Here is why: 1) You end up with less (functional) code than a with a non-TDD approach. This is because with TDD you don't write code you "think you might need". You write exactly what makes the.http://blogs.codehaus.org/people/rinkrank/archives/000533_re_enough_with_the_test_driven_d... |