Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.php > #8393 > unrolled thread

simpletest vs phpunit vs ...

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.php

Contents

  simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Simon <bad@example.com> - 2013-02-19 10:05 +0200
    Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-02-19 08:22 -0500
      Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Goran <goran@nospam.com> - 2013-02-21 11:09 +0100
        Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Scott Johnson <noonehome@chalupasworld.com> - 2013-02-21 05:40 -0800
          Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Goran <goran@nospam.com> - 2013-02-22 09:05 +0100
            Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-02-22 08:52 -0500
              Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Goran <goran@nospam.com> - 2013-02-22 16:03 +0100
                Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-02-22 10:14 -0500
    Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-21 19:27 +0000
      Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Chris Riesbeck <Chris.Riesbeck@gmail.com> - 2013-02-21 14:08 -0600
        Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-21 21:53 +0000
          Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2013-02-21 22:20 +0000
            Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-22 00:51 +0000
              Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2013-02-22 11:29 +0100
                Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-22 20:21 +0000
              Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2013-02-22 10:49 +0000
                Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-22 20:23 +0000
                  Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2013-02-22 21:41 +0100
                    Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-23 00:39 +0000
                      Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-02-22 19:51 -0500
                        Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-24 23:49 +0000
                          Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-02-24 20:17 -0500
                      Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2013-02-23 07:51 +0100
                        Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-25 00:03 +0000
                          Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> - 2013-02-25 19:28 +0100
              Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2013-02-22 12:24 +0100
                Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-22 20:26 +0000
              Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Simon <bad@example.com> - 2013-02-22 14:06 +0200
              Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-02-22 08:57 -0500
                Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... bill <william@TechServSys.com> - 2013-02-22 10:55 -0500
                Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) - 2013-02-22 20:27 +0000
                  Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2013-02-22 16:57 -0500
    Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Simon <bad@example.com> - 2013-02-22 14:15 +0200
    Re: simpletest vs phpunit vs ... Martin Musatov <marty.musatov@gmail.com> - 2013-02-22 23:38 -0800

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#8393 — simpletest vs phpunit vs ...

Hi,

I currently use Simpletest to unit test the back-end of my site, (I 
still aim to cover the front-end at some later stage).
I have about 2000 tests and try to write more every day...

But am now wondering if, long term, Simpletest is the right tool for 
unit testing my app.

If for not other reason than it has not been updated for some time now, 
and, maybe more importantly, there hardly seems to be any support for it 
in general.
PHPUnit on the other hand, seems to have a much larger support base, 
regular updates/discussions.

Most comparisons I Googled seem to be 2 or 3 years old, nothing really 
'current', (for example, 
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/34312/simple-test-vs-phpunit).

Shall I bite the bullet now and move to phpunit or will simpletest still 
be good enough for a long, long time?

Any comments/suggestions?

Thanks

Simon

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8406

On 2/19/2013 3:05 AM, Simon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I currently use Simpletest to unit test the back-end of my site, (I
> still aim to cover the front-end at some later stage).
> I have about 2000 tests and try to write more every day...
>
> But am now wondering if, long term, Simpletest is the right tool for
> unit testing my app.
>
> If for not other reason than it has not been updated for some time now,
> and, maybe more importantly, there hardly seems to be any support for it
> in general.
> PHPUnit on the other hand, seems to have a much larger support base,
> regular updates/discussions.
>
> Most comparisons I Googled seem to be 2 or 3 years old, nothing really
> 'current', (for example,
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/34312/simple-test-vs-phpunit).
>
> Shall I bite the bullet now and move to phpunit or will simpletest still
> be good enough for a long, long time?
>
> Any comments/suggestions?
>
> Thanks
>
> Simon

I don't use any packages.  I write my own tests, based on the design 
criteria.  It isn't all that hard and can do a more thorough job of testing.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8412

On 19.2.2013 14:22, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> I don't use any packages.  I write my own tests, based on the design
> criteria.  It isn't all that hard and can do a more thorough job of
> testing.

Sounds like fun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8413

On 2/21/2013 2:09 AM, Goran wrote:
> On 19.2.2013 14:22, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> I don't use any packages.  I write my own tests, based on the design
>> criteria.  It isn't all that hard and can do a more thorough job of
>> testing.
>
> Sounds like fun
>

If you want fun you go Skiing, if you want something done right, for the 
most part, do it yourself. :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8426

On 21.2.2013 14:40, Scott Johnson wrote:
> On 2/21/2013 2:09 AM, Goran wrote:
>> On 19.2.2013 14:22, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> I don't use any packages.  I write my own tests, based on the design
>>> criteria.  It isn't all that hard and can do a more thorough job of
>>> testing.
>>
>> Sounds like fun
>>
> 
> If you want fun you go Skiing, if you want something done right, for the
> most part, do it yourself. :)

I just thought we are supposed to build applications, not platforms :)
Foolish me

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8432

On 2/22/2013 3:05 AM, Goran wrote:
> On 21.2.2013 14:40, Scott Johnson wrote:
>> On 2/21/2013 2:09 AM, Goran wrote:
>>> On 19.2.2013 14:22, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>> I don't use any packages.  I write my own tests, based on the design
>>>> criteria.  It isn't all that hard and can do a more thorough job of
>>>> testing.
>>>
>>> Sounds like fun
>>>
>>
>> If you want fun you go Skiing, if you want something done right, for the
>> most part, do it yourself. :)
>
> I just thought we are supposed to build applications, not platforms :)
> Foolish me
>

I do build applications.  Tests are not platforms.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8434

On 22.2.2013 14:52, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 2/22/2013 3:05 AM, Goran wrote:
>> On 21.2.2013 14:40, Scott Johnson wrote:
>>> On 2/21/2013 2:09 AM, Goran wrote:
>>>> On 19.2.2013 14:22, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>>> I don't use any packages.  I write my own tests, based on the design
>>>>> criteria.  It isn't all that hard and can do a more thorough job of
>>>>> testing.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like fun
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you want fun you go Skiing, if you want something done right, for the
>>> most part, do it yourself. :)
>>
>> I just thought we are supposed to build applications, not platforms :)
>> Foolish me
>>
> 
> I do build applications.  Tests are not platforms.

True, but platform for running tests is... well, platform

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8435

On 2/22/2013 10:03 AM, Goran wrote:
> On 22.2.2013 14:52, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> On 2/22/2013 3:05 AM, Goran wrote:
>>> On 21.2.2013 14:40, Scott Johnson wrote:
>>>> On 2/21/2013 2:09 AM, Goran wrote:
>>>>> On 19.2.2013 14:22, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>>>>> I don't use any packages.  I write my own tests, based on the design
>>>>>> criteria.  It isn't all that hard and can do a more thorough job of
>>>>>> testing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like fun
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you want fun you go Skiing, if you want something done right, for the
>>>> most part, do it yourself. :)
>>>
>>> I just thought we are supposed to build applications, not platforms :)
>>> Foolish me
>>>
>>
>> I do build applications.  Tests are not platforms.
>
> True, but platform for running tests is... well, platform
>

Testing is best done by someone other than the programmer(s) writing 
tests according to the documentation.  That way you can thoroughly test 
what the code is supposed to do according to the design.

In such a case, not only do you not need a platform - a platform will 
generally get in the way of performing the necessary tests.

Some people think they need a platform for everything.  That isn't true.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8420

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Simon <bad@example.com> spake the secret code
<aogq26FaaoiU1@mid.individual.net> thusly:

>Shall I bite the bullet now and move to phpunit or will simpletest still 
>be good enough for a long, long time?

I've been using phpunit.  What I find lacking is a good mocking
library, so I end up writing my own state-based fake objects that
derive from my interface.  I'd really like to find something that is
as expressive as jMock is for java mock objects, but so far I haven't
found anything that seems to work that way.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
         The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8421

On 2/21/2013 1:27 PM, Richard wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>
> Simon <bad@example.com> spake the secret code
> <aogq26FaaoiU1@mid.individual.net> thusly:
>
>> Shall I bite the bullet now and move to phpunit or will simpletest still
>> be good enough for a long, long time?
>
> I've been using phpunit.  What I find lacking is a good mocking
> library, so I end up writing my own state-based fake objects that
> derive from my interface.  I'd really like to find something that is
> as expressive as jMock is for java mock objects, but so far I haven't
> found anything that seems to work that way.
>

I'm curious which specific aspects of jMock you most wanted that weren't 
in PHPunit's Mock objects

http://www.phpunit.de/manual/3.0/en/mock-objects.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8422

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Chris Riesbeck <Chris.Riesbeck@gmail.com> spake the secret code
<aond6kFphqiU1@mid.individual.net> thusly:

>I'm curious which specific aspects of jMock you most wanted that weren't 
>in PHPunit's Mock objects
>
>http://www.phpunit.de/manual/3.0/en/mock-objects.html

When I looked at it, it felt like COBOL.  SOOOOOO much typing.

I think this comparison makes my point in more detail:
<http://blog.sznapka.pl/why-mockery-is-better-than-phpunit-mock-builder-and-how-to-integrate-it-with-symfony2/>
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
         The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8423

On 21/02/13 21:53, Richard wrote:

>
> When I looked at it, it felt like COBOL.  SOOOOOO much typing.
>
Don't ever take up coding professionally.

The rule of 'more lines of comment than code' holds...




-- 
Ineptocracy

(in-ep-toc’-ra-cy) – a system of government where the least capable to 
lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the 
members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are 
rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a 
diminishing number of producers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8425

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> spake the secret code
<kg66k7$b7j$1@news.albasani.net> thusly:

>On 21/02/13 21:53, Richard wrote:
>
>>
>> When I looked at it, it felt like COBOL.  SOOOOOO much typing.
>>
>Don't ever take up coding professionally.

I've been paid to write software for 35 years.

>The rule of 'more lines of comment than code' holds...

IMO, unless you are citing sources for complex scientific computation,
or algorithms from a referenced source (i.e. "I took this from Knuth,
Art of Computer Programming, Volume II, pg. 235"), the need for
comments indicates that your code isn't clear enough to begin with.

See <http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ToNeedComments>
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
         The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8427

Am 22.02.2013 01:51, schrieb Richard:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
> 
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> spake the secret code
> <kg66k7$b7j$1@news.albasani.net> thusly:
> 
>> On 21/02/13 21:53, Richard wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> When I looked at it, it felt like COBOL.  SOOOOOO much typing.
>>>
>> Don't ever take up coding professionally.
> 
> I've been paid to write software for 35 years.
> 
>> The rule of 'more lines of comment than code' holds...
> 
> IMO, unless you are citing sources for complex scientific computation,
> or algorithms from a referenced source (i.e. "I took this from Knuth,
> Art of Computer Programming, Volume II, pg. 235"), the need for
> comments indicates that your code isn't clear enough to begin with.
> 
> See <http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ToNeedComments>
> 

Haha. Strong words.

You want a cite from Donald Knuth? See literate programming, and WEB, 1981.

/Str.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8438

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

"M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> spake the secret code
<aoovl2F5f8gU1@mid.uni-berlin.de> thusly:

>>> The rule of 'more lines of comment than code' holds...
>> 
>> IMO, unless you are citing sources for complex scientific computation,
>> or algorithms from a referenced source (i.e. "I took this from Knuth,
>> Art of Computer Programming, Volume II, pg. 235"), the need for
>> comments indicates that your code isn't clear enough to begin with.
>> 
>> See <http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ToNeedComments>
>> 
>
>Haha. Strong words.

See also Refowler, "Refactoring" where comments as a code smell are
discussed.

The point of mentioning Knuth was simply to use AoCP as a source of
algorithms one might use in a bibliographic style citation comment.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
         The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8428

In article <kg6ff8$jvi$1@news.xmission.com>,
 legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) wrote:

> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
> 
> The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> spake the secret code
> <kg66k7$b7j$1@news.albasani.net> thusly:
> 
> >On 21/02/13 21:53, Richard wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> When I looked at it, it felt like COBOL.  SOOOOOO much typing.
> >>
> >Don't ever take up coding professionally.
> 
> I've been paid to write software for 35 years.
> 
> >The rule of 'more lines of comment than code' holds...
> 
> IMO, unless you are citing sources for complex scientific computation,
> or algorithms from a referenced source (i.e. "I took this from Knuth,
> Art of Computer Programming, Volume II, pg. 235"), the need for
> comments indicates that your code isn't clear enough to begin with.

That code might be clear now, but wait a few months. Or get the view of 
the poor bugger who is now *maintaining* your code.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8439

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> spake the secret code
<timstreater-DEEF13.10492722022013@news.individual.net> thusly:

>In article <kg6ff8$jvi$1@news.xmission.com>,
> legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) wrote:

>> IMO, unless you are citing sources for complex scientific computation,
>> or algorithms from a referenced source (i.e. "I took this from Knuth,
>> Art of Computer Programming, Volume II, pg. 235"), the need for
>> comments indicates that your code isn't clear enough to begin with.
>
>That code might be clear now, but wait a few months. Or get the view of 
>the poor bugger who is now *maintaining* your code.

In my decades of experience looking at other people's code, code that
is aggressively refactored and has well chosen identifiers -- in other
words the kind of code that I and others are saying doesn't need
explanatory comments -- is much, much more maintainable years or
decades later than code festooned with explanatory comments.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
         The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8442

legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard) writes:

> In my decades of experience looking at other people's code, code that
> is aggressively refactored and has well chosen identifiers -- in other
> words the kind of code that I and others are saying doesn't need
> explanatory comments -- is much, much more maintainable years or
> decades later than code festooned with explanatory comments.

 You are right. And you're wrong.

 I guess that your primary work is on a _product_ that is debugged,
refined, relased over and over again, but never exist in more than one
incarnation. If that is so, you are probably right.

 If on the other hand, you had been working in a project organization,
like I do, you would have known that there isn't enough time to
refactor all 600.000 lines of code[1], for each of the 600 projects
that has 92-96% of the code in common. What you'd do, had you worked
at my job, would be commenting the changes to the routing code
algorithm. And depending on the particulars, it could be so simple as
to explain that characters 4 to 17 of the barcode scanned is looked up
in a table that tells the destination, or refering to a 17 page
flowchart[2], that explains the neccesity of all the backtracking
that's done.

 My claim is that what works for you, doesn't neccesarily work for
everyone else.


1. C in this case. But that's probably not changing the merits of my
   observations.

2.I'm not making this up. There's one postal order company in Germany,
  that sorts parcel according to the individual rules of 13 different
  european countries, an with barcode labels having a rather limited
  amount of expression, wrt. length and typology, this leads to
  insanity.

-- 
/Wegge

Leder efter redundant peering af dk.*,linux.debian.*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8448

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> spake the secret code
<87ehg8ozce.fsf@huddi.jernurt.dk> thusly:

> If on the other hand, you had been working in a project organization,
>like I do, you would have known that there isn't enough time to
>refactor all 600.000 lines of code[1], for each of the 600 projects
>that has 92-96% of the code in common.

This is a straw-man argument, because I didn't assert any such thing.
-- 
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
     The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
         The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
  Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8449

On 2/22/2013 7:39 PM, Richard wrote:
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
>
> Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@wegge.dk> spake the secret code
> <87ehg8ozce.fsf@huddi.jernurt.dk> thusly:
>
>> If on the other hand, you had been working in a project organization,
>> like I do, you would have known that there isn't enough time to
>> refactor all 600.000 lines of code[1], for each of the 600 projects
>> that has 92-96% of the code in common.
>
> This is a straw-man argument, because I didn't assert any such thing.
>

It's a straw-man argument to you, because you refuse to admit he's right.

It isn't to anyone who knows what real coding is all about.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.php

csiph-web