Changes for page Mocking

Last modified by chrisby on 2023/11/28 22:32

From version 1.12
edited by chrisby
on 2023/11/28 22:32
Change comment: There is no comment for this version
To version 1.3
edited by chrisby
on 2023/05/29 12:20
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Parent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -Software Engineering.Testing.WebHome
1 +Software Architecture.Testing.WebHome
Syntax
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -CommonMark Markdown 1.2
1 +XWiki 2.1
Content
... ... @@ -1,32 +1,32 @@
1 -### Purpose
1 +=== Purpose ===
2 2  
3 -* **Mocking simplifies unit testing by replacing the dependencies** of the unit being tested with simplified, simulated versions called mocks. Example: Consider a unit under test that relies on a database. In testing, the database can be mocked to return a static value, eliminating the need for an actual database.
3 +* Mocking simplifies unit testing by replacing the dependencies of the unit being tested with simplified, simulated versions called mocks.
4 +* Example: Consider a unit under test that relies on a database. In testing, the database can be mocked to return a static value, eliminating the need for an actual database.
4 4  
5 -### Benefits of Mocking
6 +=== Benefits of Mocking ===
6 6  
7 -* **Isolation of units** to test each unit separately, dramatically reducing complexity and increasing test execution speed by replacing loaded modules with mocks.
8 -* **Simplifies the re-creation of specific scenarios** (use cases, boundary cases) in which a dependency behaves in a particular way.
9 -* **Expose hidden internals** of production code without compromising encapsulation.
10 -* **Injection of test-specific behaviors** not present in production code.
11 -* **Enables the simulation of indirect dependencies** by letting mocks return other mocks.
8 +* Isolation of units to test each unit separately, dramatically reducing complexity and increasing test execution speed by replacing loaded modules with mocks.
9 +* Simplifies the re-creation of specific scenarios (use cases, boundary cases).
10 +* Expose hidden internals of production code without compromising encapsulation.
11 +* Injection of test-specific behaviors not present in production code.
12 +* Enables the simulation of indirect dependencies by letting mocks return other mocks.
12 12  
13 -### Types of Mocks
14 +=== Types of Mocks ===
14 14  
16 +(% style="text-align: justify;" %)
15 15  Stubs are by far the most common type of mock. Keep your tests as simple as possible. Make them more complex only when necessary.
16 16  
17 17  * **Stubs**: Simplest form, returning a hardcoded value or providing an empty method body.
18 18  * **Fake object**: Include minimal logic to handle different case scenarios.
19 -* **Spy**: Records internal data of the unit being tested when such data is not directly accessible.
20 -* **Mock object**: Contains complex logic, simulates behaviors such as computation and exception handling, and can even run tests.
21 +* **Spy**: Injected to capture interaction data with fake objects when such data is not directly accessible.
22 +* **Mock objects**: Contain complex logic, simulate behaviors such as computation and exception handling, and even run tests.
21 21  
22 -###
24 +=== Tips ===
23 23  
24 -### Tips
25 -
26 -* **Mock third-party libraries in unit tests** to ensure proper unit functionality. However, they should not be mocked in component and integration tests.
26 +* **Mock third-party libraries** for unit tests to ensure proper unit functionality. Instead, use these libraries in component and integration tests.
27 27  * Aim for a **minimal number of dependencies in a unit** for easier testing and mocking:
28 - * Limit dependencies in a unit in a similar way to the best practices for function arguments: the fewer the better, with an absolute maximum of three.
29 - * Prefer many small classes/units to one large one for easier testing.
30 - * If a class has excessive dependencies, consider splitting it up or extracting some dependencies into a new class to create smaller, more cohesive units.
31 - * If a production class requires more than one test class, it's probably a sign that the class is too large.
32 - * Overly complex test code may indicate an overly large production class.
28 +** Limit dependencies in a unit in a similar way to the best practices for function arguments: the fewer the better, with an absolute maximum of three.
29 +** Prefer many small classes/units to one large one for easier testing.
30 +** If a class has excessive dependencies, consider splitting it up or extracting some dependencies into a new class to create smaller, more cohesive units.
31 +** If a production class requires more than one test class, it's probably a sign that the class is too large.
32 +** Overly complex test code may indicate an overly large production class.