tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15045980.post1204733198786401529..comments2024-03-29T06:15:18.587-07:00Comments on Google Testing Blog: TotT: Making a Perfect MatcherMarkohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16755629501705100354noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15045980.post-88361436986436825692009-11-11T05:36:47.214-08:002009-11-11T05:36:47.214-08:00Hi Zhanyong,
My name is Gil Zilberfeld, and with ...Hi Zhanyong,<br /><br />My name is Gil Zilberfeld, and with my colleague Roy Osherove, we do a little cast called <a href="http://learn.typemock.com/this-week-in-test/2009/11/11/episode-3-magic-numbers.html" rel="nofollow">This week in testing</a>. <br /><br />This week we mention the new matcher feature, and talk about the Google mocking framework. I invite you to watch. If you like what you see, please talk about us, so more people can enjoy.<br /><br />Thanks,<br /><br />Gil Zilberfeld<br />TypemockAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18210181375618736629noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15045980.post-87718151407021784472009-11-03T02:53:07.325-08:002009-11-03T02:53:07.325-08:00I just do not get some of these matchers. Unit tes...I just do not get some of these matchers. Unit tests are meant to be consistent and repeatable, so I would be interested to find why you think there is a need for such matchers as the "in range" and "is even" ?<br />Surely the tests should be:<br />given a number x it is guaranteed to give number y. If you can not guarantee the output then it seems the code being tested has a smell, this being that it depends on global state.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05768471504023765231noreply@blogger.com