开云体育

If I understand correctly, the code here is specifically for doing an Ecto transformation, correct? If you decide not to use Ecto the need for this abstraction is removed? brought to you by the

TL;DR: For various reasons, I was trying to avoid the use of mocks in this app. I’m asking how a particular problem would be nicely solved without them. I should note that I have a guideline that a

We still don't know the context, but it seems like we have some kind of a thing that either has fields that are sometimes mod and sometimes not, or sometimes has mod fields added to it. That could be

What motivates implementing a setter method under TDD unless there is a test that requires it to exist and work? Extra tests would only be required if we also need to implement is<X>Modifiable() for

If we're gonna be like that, wouldn't you need a test for every modifiable field? :) Ron Jeffries ronjeffries.com <http://ronjeffries.com/> Master your instrument, master the music, then forget all

Just because an object has a method implemented to "know" whether or not a field is modifiable does not mean that that method is correctly implemented. If there is such a method, you would still have

Yes. And if I didn't mind modifying a field, testing it that way is OK. If I knew the context I'd have a better idea but as it stands I'm thinking my object must know whether it can modify fields or

Best to test to behaviour, not implementation/capability, I think. brought to you by the letters A, V, and I and the number 47 wrote:

I was thinking I'd ask the object if it had updatable fields, but it'd depend on an understanding of the problem and solution that I don't presently have. Ron Jeffries ronjeffries.com

The way I test if animals have updatable fields, I try to update a field and check that it updated. Alan Baljeualanbaljeu@...

What I’m guessing is that you invent an assertion that, when true of the return value, implies that it has been made “with updatable fields”. So it’s a property of the data rather than a

Here’s some code I have: Here’s a correctness claim about that code: “any function that returns one or more Animals must ensure that those animals have ‘updatable fields’”. I come from a

Thank you, everyone, who volunteered. I think we have enough for now. You who have become moderators will notice new emails notifying you of messages waiting for approval. View them online, where you

I have a system that is doing this part of the time.? It is fraught with problems when doing the search.? In your case, searching for "John Smith" may return a set of records, while the creation is

Hi J.B. If you still need moderators, then I'll volunteer to help. Let me know what you need me to do. Thanks, Rick [email protected]> wrote:

I volunteer! -Guilherme Froes Em seg., 25 de nov. de 2019 às 10:07, J. B. Rainsberger < [email protected]> escreveu:

On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 10:22 AM Steve Gordon <sgordonphd@...> wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:07 AM Edwin Castro <egcastr@...> wrote: > >> >> >> Or perhaps we just don't do enough

Also happy to help. [email protected]> wrote:

When I was a professor, all I taught was problem solving. Students hated it because they could not just memorize terms for my tests, and the student evaluations reflected it. Grading also took a lot

Since the busy days of this list all those years ago I’ve retired, but I still code in partnership with my son. He’s fairly receptive to the idea of TDD, less interested in the refactoring part.