Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | OrangeMusic's commentslogin

À major one.


How's that related? (Please don't reply with a link to a seemingly random Wikipedia article).


This is a bad faith argument. English is (like it or not) the international language. If you want tourists to understand what's happening, do announcements in your local language and in English.

Making announcements in German in the US makes little sense.


How convenient for monoglot English speakers!


Mojitos aren't popular anymore?!


The second way is usually referring to as "fakes", which are not a type of mocks but a (better) alternative to mocks.


In reflection heavy environments and with injection and reflection heavy frameworks the distinction is a bit more obvious and relevant (.Net, Java). In some cases the mock configuration blossoms to essentially parallel implementations, leading to the brittleness discussed earlier in the thread.

Technically creating a shim or stub object is mocking, but “faking” isn’t using a mocking framework to track incoming calls or internal behaviours. Done properly, IMO, you’re using inheritance and the opportunity through the TDD process to polish & refine the inheritance story and internal interface of key subsystems. Much like TDD helps design interfaces by giving you earlier external interface consumers, you also get early inheritors if you are, say, creating test services with fixed output.

In ideal implementations those stub or “fake” services answer the “given…” part of user stories leaving minimalistic focused tests. Delivering hardcoded dictionaries of test data built with appropriate helpers is minimal and easy to keep up to date, without undue extra work, and doing that kind of stub work often identifies early re-use needs/benefits in the code-base. The exact features needed to evolve the system as unexpected change requests roll in are there already, as QA/end-users are the systems second rodeo, not first.

The mocking antipatterns cluster around ORM misuse and tend to leak implementation details (leading to those brittle tests), and is often co-morbid with anemic domains and other cargo cult cruft. Needing intense mocking utility and frameworks on a system you own is a smell.

For corner cases and exhaustiveness I prefer to be able to do meaningful integration tests in memory as far as possible too (in conjunction with more comprehensive tests). Faster feedback means faster work.


> nobody really uses Mastodon anyway

760 000 active users [1] beg to differ

[1]: https://mastodon-analytics.com/


Wow that is more than I thought, I take it back

edit: the graph is not great, it seems to have plateaued, but also not decreasing. Good for a decentralized protocol.


Towards the end?! I can't answer ANY of the questions!


You're not expected to know the answers without doing research. https://britbrief.co.uk/education/schools/king-williams-coll...

>The paper carries a telling Latin motto: "Scire ubi aliquid invenire possis ea demum maxima pars eruditionis est" – "To know where you can find something is, after all, the greatest part of learning."

In the modern era it is acknowledged that people will use online search engines to find the answers but hopefully we all learn something on the way


I know the answer to 1.5. And I know the story behind 1.6, but not the name of the town... That's it :)


?


Sometimes titles are inaccurate


It was sarcasm.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: