|
This might be a dumb question, but I've a client who has a specced out project they've approached us with. It's bizarrely specific in some cases (e.g. 'use Ruby on Rails on Cake PHP on Gentoo Linux') and opaque in others ('database: don't use Oracle') and contradictory in yet others ('check for aspx errors' on php?). One of their criteria calls for an audit phase that involves unit testing; the impression I'd gotten is that the dynamism of Ruby pretty well means you can't easily do this. Am I wrong?
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2012 21:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:I think you are. Unit testing seems relatively popular in Ruby development. Ruby has two unit testing frameworks built into the standard library (well, one and a half), and there's a handful of others that people use. All you have to do as far as dynamism is test behaviors rather than identities: expect a returned object to respond to some methods, rather than have the class MethodResponder or whatever. Thanks for the info. My testing background thus far has been as you've said, more about the Class style response. This makes sense for Ruby, though it feels less exhaustive. Also that example is as real as the day is long. I don't 'own' this client, they approached us and we're still considering taking them on. I'm not quite sure what direction this will take but will after the initial proto-meeting tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 29, 2012 01:35
|
|
|
Physical posted:Why is Vi worth using? Because it makes emacs users hate you.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 29, 2012 21:26
|
|