Comments on: Testing declarative code http://therealadam.com/archive/2009/10/27/testing-declarative-code/ Polymath practicing programming, probably procrastinating Fri, 05 Mar 2010 07:52:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Ed Spencer http://therealadam.com/archive/2009/10/27/testing-declarative-code/comment-page-1/#comment-901 Ed Spencer Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:04:59 +0000 http://therealadam.com/?p=846#comment-901 I've had this exact same problem, but I don't know the answer :( I wrote a bunch of rspec macros to reduce my previously multi-line specs which test various model declarations down to a single line, but then found myself in the same situation you describe... My thinking at the moment is that duplicating a model declaration with a spec declaration is pointless, and not very dry. Any getter/setter tests should be abstracted up to the DSL library level and the model declarations left to speak for themselves. I could be wrong though :) I’ve had this exact same problem, but I don’t know the answer :(

I wrote a bunch of rspec macros to reduce my previously multi-line specs which test various model declarations down to a single line, but then found myself in the same situation you describe…

My thinking at the moment is that duplicating a model declaration with a spec declaration is pointless, and not very dry. Any getter/setter tests should be abstracted up to the DSL library level and the model declarations left to speak for themselves. I could be wrong though :)

]]> By: Adam Keys http://therealadam.com/archive/2009/10/27/testing-declarative-code/comment-page-1/#comment-900 Adam Keys Wed, 28 Oct 2009 15:41:28 +0000 http://therealadam.com/?p=846#comment-900 You make a good point about testing accessors. However, I like the _idea_ of testing the contract of a class, and accessors are certainly part of the contract. But liking the idea does not mean I'm going to stick with it in practice ;) You make a good point about testing accessors. However, I like the idea of testing the contract of a class, and accessors are certainly part of the contract. But liking the idea does not mean I’m going to stick with it in practice ;)

]]> By: Jamie Macey http://therealadam.com/archive/2009/10/27/testing-declarative-code/comment-page-1/#comment-899 Jamie Macey Wed, 28 Oct 2009 12:36:37 +0000 http://therealadam.com/?p=846#comment-899 I'd say leave that test out, and also leave the key declarations out until they're storing data you need for some behaviour. I presume the 'key' statements both set up (a) an accessor on the attribute, and (b) persistent storage of the values - testing plain readers/writers doesn't gain much IMO, and you'll be testing storage in general at higher level tests. I’d say leave that test out, and also leave the key declarations out until they’re storing data you need for some behaviour. I presume the ‘key’ statements both set up (a) an accessor on the attribute, and (b) persistent storage of the values - testing plain readers/writers doesn’t gain much IMO, and you’ll be testing storage in general at higher level tests.

]]>