May 2011 - Esug-list - lists.esug.org

Re: [Esug-list] Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011

by John O'Keefe

Dennis - Yes, I would very much like to hear what you've done with Mock Objects. Niall makes some interesting points in his note about alternatives and I think it would be good to explore these as part of your presentation since they seem to be related to why we haven't seen mocks used more commonly in Smalltalk. John O'Keefe [|], Principal Smalltalk Architect, Instantiations Inc. Skype: john_okeefe2 Mobile: +1 919 417-3181 (Business hours USA Eastern Time zone (GMT -5)) john_okeefe(a)instantiations.com http://www.instantiations.com *VA Smalltalk...Onward and Upward!* On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:36 AM, Dennis Schetinin <chaetal(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Hello! > > I'd like to explore interest to Mock Object in Smalltalk society. I'm > currently working on the topic, preparing a paper and presentation targeting > at ESUG 2011. > > I plan to present Mock Objects technique itself and a framework named > Mocketry as a tool helping to apply it in practice. Of course I'll provide a > small example to illustrate some of the ideas. > > Apparently, Mocks technique is not popular tool among Smalltalkers. It even > seems (to me), TDD is not as widely used as it could and should be (despite > the fact it was born in Smalltalk). I have been using TDD and Mocks for many > years in different projects with Smalltalk and other languages. Sometimes it > was hard, sometimes I was even giving it up, but by now I think I have > sufficient experience to state that TDD in general and Mock Objects > specifically do deserve (at least) more attention by smalltalkers. Yes, > Smalltalk is great language and it has great tools. This damps some aspects > of the problems TDD and Mocks address, but for sure does not remove them > totally. More than that, I can say I was most productive in Smalltalk when I > used "classic TDD" and mocks in conjunction. > > > So, are other Smalltalkers interested in this topic? Do you think it worth > to be presented at the conference? What are the problems you'd like to > discuss there? > > TIA > > -- > Dennis Schetinin > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > >

May 27, 2011

Re: [Esug-list] Fwd: Re: Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011

by Niall Ross

Dear Dennis, > I'd like to explore interest to Mock Object in Smalltalk society. I'm > currently working on the topic, preparing a paper and presentation > targeting at ESUG 2011. Sounds interesting. Steve Freeman (via Joseph Pelrine) wrote: > You should talk to Tim, he wrote a mocks library in about 3 classes > (which is what it should take). He also has some interesting > experience from the Kapital project that doesn't have unit tests. Tim Mackinnon mentions mock objects in his talk 'Expressive Testing and Code for Free' at ESUG 2007 (report reachable from http://www.esug.org/Conferences) You remark > Apparently, Mocks technique is not popular tool among Smalltalkers. and Steve, noting that, says > > I hadn't realised that the ST world was behind in this respect. I note that one or two who replied to your earlier post said they had not needed Mocks, or found them brittle, but I don't think the technique is _unpopular_ in Smalltalk. My own take is 1) Smalltalk's power means mocks are not needed as often. Many a time, you can get at what you need directly, or by use method wrappers to make the real objects (or the routes to them) act momentarily as mocks. Here, I may be saying the same as you: >> Yes, Smalltalk is great language and it has great tools. >> This damps some aspects of the problems TDD and Mocks address, but for >> sure does not remove them totally. > 2) Another dynamic language feature is that you can more easily structure tests so the same test can be run against both the mock and the real object when the latter is available. (The approach is the same as in my talk "eXtreme UI Testing" at Smalltalk Solutions 2007, also reachable from the http://www.esug.org/Conferences page.) These features may sometimes make people less thorough in setting up a full mocks framework for their application's tests. >> It even seems (to me), TDD is not as widely used as it could and should >> be (despite the fact it was born in Smalltalk). > I don't think TDD is in the least unpopular or unrespected in Smalltalk. However I'm sure you are right when you say it "is not as widely used as it could and should be", though I'd be surprised if that were more true of Smalltalk than of other languages. >> I have been using TDD and >> Mocks for many years in different projects with Smalltalk and other >> languages. Sometimes it was hard, sometimes I was even giving it up, but >> by now I think I have sufficient experience to state that TDD in general >> and Mock Objects specifically do deserve (at least) more attention by >> Smalltalkers. ... I was most productive in Smalltalk when I used >> "classic TDD" and mocks in conjunction. > If your talk uses your experience to illuminate why what we "could and should be" doing was "sometimes ... hard ... even giving it up", but "most productive", that might be very useful to others. Yours faithfully Niall Ross ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________

May 27, 2011

Re: [Esug-list] Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011

by simondenier

That's interesting. I recently started to use Cucumber with Rails, which looks like another step in BDD with specs written in look-alike natural language. Hard to beat in terms of readibility, even with the Smalltalk syntax. But that's another topic. http://cukes.info/ On topic I started to read the GOOS book written by two pioneers of mocks, and I think it's a recommended reading on the topic of objects + TDD + mock. Just read the first chapters for now but it's in line with my own conception of objects yet offers some interesting insights about design. I think Tim McKinnon which has been a regular participant of Smalltalk events in the past years might have a word or two on the topic :) http://www.growing-object-oriented-software.com/ -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Proposal-for-Mock-Objects-at-ESUG-2011-tp3554367p3554… Sent from the ESUG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

May 27, 2011

Fwd: Re: Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011

by Joseph Pelrine

Hi all, I took the liberty of forwarding this mail to Tim Mackinnon and Steve Freeman, who invented the original Mock Objects. Here's Steve's answer. I'll forward further mails to this list. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Esug-list] Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011 Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 09:25:30 +0100 From: Steve Freeman <steve(a)m3p.co.uk> To: Joseph Pelrine <jpelrine(a)metaprog.com> You should talk to Tim, he wrote a mocks library in about 3 classes (which is what it should take). He also has some interesting experience from the Kapital project that doesn't have unit tests. I hadn't realised that the ST world was behind in this respect. S. On 27 May 2011, at 05:41, Joseph Pelrine wrote: > FYI > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [Esug-list] Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011 > Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 08:36:27 +0400 > From: Dennis Schetinin <chaetal(a)gmail.com> > To: ESUG Mailing list <esug-list(a)lists.esug.org> > > > > Hello! > > I'd like to explore interest to Mock Object in Smalltalk society. I'm > currently working on the topic, preparing a paper and presentation > targeting at ESUG 2011. > > I plan to present Mock Objects technique itself and a framework named > Mocketry as a tool helping to apply it in practice. Of course I'll > provide a small example to illustrate some of the ideas. > > Apparently, Mocks technique is not popular tool among Smalltalkers. It > even seems (to me), TDD is not as widely used as it could and should be > (despite the fact it was born in Smalltalk). I have been using TDD and > Mocks for many years in different projects with Smalltalk and other > languages. Sometimes it was hard, sometimes I was even giving it up, but > by now I think I have sufficient experience to state that TDD in general > and Mock Objects specifically do deserve (at least) more attention by > smalltalkers. Yes, Smalltalk is great language and it has great tools. > This damps some aspects of the problems TDD and Mocks address, but for > sure does not remove them totally. More than that, I can say I was most > productive in Smalltalk when I used "classic TDD" and mocks in conjunction. > > > So, are other Smalltalkers interested in this topic? Do you think it > worth to be presented at the conference? What are the problems you'd > like to discuss there? > > TIA > > -- > Dennis Schetinin > <Attached Message Part.txt> Steve Freeman Winner of the Agile Alliance Gordon Pask award 2006 Book: http://www.growing-object-oriented-software.com +44 (0) 797 179 4105 M3P Limited. http://www.m3p.co.uk Registered office. 2 Church Street, Burnham, Bucks, SL1 7HZ. Company registered in England & Wales. Number 03689627

May 27, 2011

Re: [Esug-list] Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011

by Francois Stephany

Hi Dennis, I would also be interested in a Mock presentation. Not really about the concepts but practical cases. We all have needed mocks/stubs one day and it would be interesting to see how/where people use them. It is sometimes hard to know where to mock and how far we should mock. Cheers, Francois On 27/05/11 06:36, Dennis Schetinin wrote: > Hello! > > I'd like to explore interest to Mock Object in Smalltalk society. I'm > currently working on the topic, preparing a paper and presentation > targeting at ESUG 2011. > > I plan to present Mock Objects technique itself and a framework named > Mocketry as a tool helping to apply it in practice. Of course I'll > provide a small example to illustrate some of the ideas. > > Apparently, Mocks technique is not popular tool among Smalltalkers. It > even seems (to me), TDD is not as widely used as it could and should be > (despite the fact it was born in Smalltalk). I have been using TDD and > Mocks for many years in different projects with Smalltalk and other > languages. Sometimes it was hard, sometimes I was even giving it up, but > by now I think I have sufficient experience to state that TDD in general > and Mock Objects specifically do deserve (at least) more attention by > smalltalkers. Yes, Smalltalk is great language and it has great tools. > This damps some aspects of the problems TDD and Mocks address, but for > sure does not remove them totally. More than that, I can say I was most > productive in Smalltalk when I used "classic TDD" and mocks in conjunction. > > > So, are other Smalltalkers interested in this topic? Do you think it > worth to be presented at the conference? What are the problems you'd > like to discuss there? > > TIA > > -- > Dennis Schetinin > > > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

May 27, 2011

Re: [Esug-list] Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011

by Frank Shearar

Hi Dennis, Take a look at SSpec (http://www.squeaksource.com/SSpec.html) - that has a mocking library, and might give you a head start? frank On 27 May 2011 05:36, Dennis Schetinin <chaetal(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello! > I'd like to explore interest to Mock Object in Smalltalk society. I'm > currently working on the topic, preparing a paper and presentation targeting > at ESUG 2011. > I plan to present Mock Objects technique itself and a framework named > Mocketry as a tool helping to apply it in practice. Of course I'll provide a > small example to illustrate some of the ideas. > Apparently, Mocks technique is not popular tool among Smalltalkers. It even > seems (to me), TDD is not as widely used as it could and should be (despite > the fact it was born in Smalltalk). I have been using TDD and Mocks for many > years in different projects with Smalltalk and other languages. Sometimes it > was hard, sometimes I was even giving it up, but by now I think I have > sufficient experience to state that TDD in general and Mock Objects > specifically do deserve (at least) more attention by smalltalkers. Yes, > Smalltalk is great language and it has great tools. This damps some aspects > of the problems TDD and Mocks address, but for sure does not remove them > totally. More than that, I can say I was most productive in Smalltalk when I > used "classic TDD" and mocks in conjunction. > > So, are other Smalltalkers interested in this topic? Do you think it worth > to be presented at the conference? What are the problems you'd like to > discuss there? > TIA > -- > Dennis Schetinin > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > >

May 27, 2011

Re: [Esug-list] Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011

by Luc Fabresse

Hi Dennis, I would be interested in such a presentation. I use TDD but I only needed mock objects in very few situations. Perhaps, it is because they are only needed in special cases? So yes I definitly interested in your presentation and improve my understanding on that topic ;-) Bests, Luc Fabresse http://luc.user.fr 2011/5/27 Dennis Schetinin <chaetal(a)gmail.com> > Hello! > > I'd like to explore interest to Mock Object in Smalltalk society. I'm > currently working on the topic, preparing a paper and presentation targeting > at ESUG 2011. > > I plan to present Mock Objects technique itself and a framework named > Mocketry as a tool helping to apply it in practice. Of course I'll provide a > small example to illustrate some of the ideas. > > Apparently, Mocks technique is not popular tool among Smalltalkers. It even > seems (to me), TDD is not as widely used as it could and should be (despite > the fact it was born in Smalltalk). I have been using TDD and Mocks for many > years in different projects with Smalltalk and other languages. Sometimes it > was hard, sometimes I was even giving it up, but by now I think I have > sufficient experience to state that TDD in general and Mock Objects > specifically do deserve (at least) more attention by smalltalkers. Yes, > Smalltalk is great language and it has great tools. This damps some aspects > of the problems TDD and Mocks address, but for sure does not remove them > totally. More than that, I can say I was most productive in Smalltalk when I > used "classic TDD" and mocks in conjunction. > > > So, are other Smalltalkers interested in this topic? Do you think it worth > to be presented at the conference? What are the problems you'd like to > discuss there? > > TIA > > -- > Dennis Schetinin > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > >

May 27, 2011

Proposal for Mock Objects at ESUG 2011

by Dennis Schetinin

Hello! I'd like to explore interest to Mock Object in Smalltalk society. I'm currently working on the topic, preparing a paper and presentation targeting at ESUG 2011. I plan to present Mock Objects technique itself and a framework named Mocketry as a tool helping to apply it in practice. Of course I'll provide a small example to illustrate some of the ideas. Apparently, Mocks technique is not popular tool among Smalltalkers. It even seems (to me), TDD is not as widely used as it could and should be (despite the fact it was born in Smalltalk). I have been using TDD and Mocks for many years in different projects with Smalltalk and other languages. Sometimes it was hard, sometimes I was even giving it up, but by now I think I have sufficient experience to state that TDD in general and Mock Objects specifically do deserve (at least) more attention by smalltalkers. Yes, Smalltalk is great language and it has great tools. This damps some aspects of the problems TDD and Mocks address, but for sure does not remove them totally. More than that, I can say I was most productive in Smalltalk when I used "classic TDD" and mocks in conjunction. So, are other Smalltalkers interested in this topic? Do you think it worth to be presented at the conference? What are the problems you'd like to discuss there? TIA -- Dennis Schetinin

May 27, 2011

Re: [Esug-list] ESUG SummerTalk - Fuel, binary object serializer

by Marcus Denker

On May 26, 2011, at 9:41 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Yoshiki Ohshima <yoshiki(a)vpri.org> wrote: > BTW, the page (http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/web/pier/software/Fuel) > says: > ... > Gofer new > squeaksource: 'Fuel'; > package: 'ConfigurationOfFuel'; > load. > ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfFuel) project latestVersion) load: #(Core Tests Benchmarks). > > And there is always an up-to-date build on Hudson: https://pharo-ic.lille.inria.fr/hudson/job/Fuel/ This is automatically rebuild when Pharo 1.3 gets updates (which means 1-2 times per day). (And on commits to the Fuel repository, but this trigger seems to not work right now...) Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.

May 26, 2011

Re: [Esug-list] ESUG SummerTalk - Fuel, binary object serializer

by Martin Dias

On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 9:29 PM, Yoshiki Ohshima <yoshiki(a)vpri.org> wrote: > >> BTW, the page (http://rmod.lille.inria.fr/web/pier/software/Fuel) >> says: >> >> Gofer new >> squeaksource: 'Fuel'; >> package: 'ConfigurationOfFuel'; >> load. >> ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfFuel) project =latestVersion) load: #(Core >> Tests Benchmarks). >> >> it does not appear to be a valid expression. What is the right >> expression? >> > > the = > > Hi! Sorry, now it is fixed. > Try: > > > > Gofer new > squeaksource: 'Fuel'; > package: 'ConfigurationOfFuel'; > load. > ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfFuel) project latestVersion) load: #(Core > Tests Benchmarks). > > > >> >> -- Yoshiki >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Esug-list mailing list >> Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org >> http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org >> > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > >

May 26, 2011