Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@g...> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:03 PM, John Cowan <johnwcowan@g...> wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 10:27 AM, Michael Kay <mike@s...> wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm completely bemused. I thought Schematron assertions, like XMLUnit >>> assertions, were both XPath. Why is one better than the other? >> >> >> According to reports in other messages in this thread, because XMLUnit has >> no way of setting the context node, so all XPaths must be absolute. (I >> don't know this of my own knowledge, I'm just reporting.) >> > Yes thats another way of summarising it. > >>> Unit testing has always been exposed to the problem that when things >>> change, tests break. >> >> >> Unit-test advocates consider this to be a Good Thing, and work hard to make >> unit tests depend only on the component being tested, all else being >> represented by mock objects whose behavior is stable because they don't have >> to really work. >> > Then they are conflating the isolation of the component under test (Good) with over-engineering their test cases (Bad). It cannot be a good thing. If things change alot and they have alot of test cases they generate alot of unnecessary unit test generating cycles that do not add value to the product.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |
