|
|
|
|
|
|
by fgeiger
1563 days ago
|
|
|
> Which I assume means that you test the "null implementations"/"infrastructure mocks" by making sure they are always aligned with the real interactions. This avoids the danger of "normal mocks" to diverge from the real interactions. When using a typed language (TS, Java, etc) this is also the case for mocks, isn't it? I don't see a reason why the implementation of the `createNull()` factory should be less prone to go out of sync with the implementation than mocks (as long as the type signatures are checked). |
|
|