I''ve just learned that "unit" and "functional" tests, in the context of Rails application development, really mean "model" and "controller" tests, respectively. [1] What terms should I use for actual unit tests? Is it sufficient to let context make the distinction clear, or does my vocabulary still need a few more patches? 1. "Integration" tests seem to retain the traditional meaning, and there are apparently no "view" tests, so at least we''re only inconsistently inconsistent. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
Hi Jeff, On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 19:31 -0500, Jeff Schwab wrote:> What terms should I use for actual unit tests? Is it > sufficient to let context make the distinction clear, > or does my vocabulary still need a few more patches?IME, you''ll do yourself and those around you a big favor if you adjust your vocabulary. What follows is one man''s experience. YMMV. You''ve got two audiences: customers and fellow developers. To customers you say something like: We''re expanding the scope of our Unit tests. That''s all they want to know. To them, Unit testing is what the developers do before they get to see the product. Expanded Unit testing - all good. To your fellow developers you say something very similar, but with a bit more explanation. You can avoid redefinition with the customoer, but not with your fellow developers. Say something like: We''re expanding the scope of our Unit tests to include automated tests that are structured to mirror Rails'' MVC pattern. We need to adjust our terminology a little though, because in Rails lingo, the terms Unit / Functional / Integration test have a different meaning than we''re used to. In Rails lingo, Unit / Functional / Integration tests are specific to our Rails Models / Controllers / Views. To avoid confusion, let''s use a prefix: ''automated-unit tests'' or ''rails-unit tests'' or something to help us distinguish between what we _used_ to mean when we said ''unit tests'' and what we _now_ mean. We''ll get through the adjustment period more quickly if help each other. So if I ask ''where are your unit tests?'', you should ask ''you mean my automated-unit tests?'' Expect it to take time and effort for the team to adjust. BTW, in case it doesn''t come through clearly, I disagree with your assessment that %q{"Integration" tests seem to retain the traditional meaning, and there are apparently no "view" tests.} All of Rails'' tests fall into the ''traditional meaning'' of Unit tests. "View" tests in Rails are accomplished via Integration tests. HTH, Bill --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
bill walton wrote:> Hi Jeff, > > On Wed, 2009-03-04 at 19:31 -0500, Jeff Schwab wrote: > >> What terms should I use for actual unit tests? Is it >> sufficient to let context make the distinction clear, >> or does my vocabulary still need a few more patches? > > IME, you''ll do yourself and those around you a big favor if you adjust > your vocabulary. What follows is one man''s experience. YMMV.Thanks for the guidance.> Expect it > to take time and effort for the team to adjust.There''s no team. Just me. I was asking for purposes of discussion in fora like this one.> BTW, in case it doesn''t come through clearly, I disagree with your > assessment that %q{"Integration" tests seem to retain the traditional > meaning, and there are apparently no "view" tests.} All of Rails'' tests > fall into the ''traditional meaning'' of Unit tests.Unit and Functional tests sort of do. I should have been clearer: to me, a Unit Test tests exactly one thing.> "View" tests in > Rails are accomplished via Integration tests.By "view tests," I meant "traditional unit tests of views." If an integration test fails, by definition, you don''t immediately know which component (if any) was at fault. If a traditional unit test of a view failed, you would know the view (or the test) was broken. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---