|
|
|
|
|
by slver
1850 days ago
|
|
That means adapters and drivers are not unit testable. This differentiation is quite pointless though. If you can spawn the dependency in memory at no cost then why not. Also not using dependencies is not the point of a unit test. Almost everything has dependencies. |
|
It's a common mistake that people think that HTTP implementations can't be unit tested too, but the truth is a bit more complicated. These libraries are essentially a wire protocol and people think of them as 'wire-protocol' instead of 'wire, protocol'. If you think of it instead as a codec with IO, then you write the codec separately and you can fully test the codec without mocking any IO at all.
It's nearly tautological that code that is written to be unit tested can be unit tested, and code that isn't cannot be. And because people want to get their code 'working' and then prove that it works, they are battling uphill to get good tests written, because good tests can't be written. And then some people use this as confirmation bias for why they shouldn't have to write tests.