Comments on: Your Private Methods are None of my Business http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/ Matt Wynne taking it one tea at a time Wed, 10 Mar 2010 04:35:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: DOug http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/comment-page-1/#comment-893 DOug Sun, 03 Jan 2010 20:19:09 +0000 http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/#comment-893 <p>You HOT>.. I'd lick that furry body all night long!</p> You HOT>.. I’d lick that furry body all night long!

]]> By: Me http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/comment-page-1/#comment-784 Me Mon, 07 Sep 2009 18:06:31 +0000 http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/#comment-784 <p>I agree, the picture is disgusting. I'm about to puke my lunch!</p> I agree, the picture is disgusting. I’m about to puke my lunch!

]]> By: Aki http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/comment-page-1/#comment-678 Aki Mon, 27 Jul 2009 07:05:13 +0000 http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/#comment-678 <p>Don't listen to that jerk, the picture is beautiful! :)</p> Don’t listen to that jerk, the picture is beautiful! :)

]]> By: Matt http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/comment-page-1/#comment-663 Matt Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:07:24 +0000 http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/#comment-663 <p>@me - so is your language! Code that isn't sufficiently encapsulated can be rather distateful too, IMO - that's the point! :)</p> @me - so is your language! Code that isn’t sufficiently encapsulated can be rather distateful too, IMO - that’s the point! :)

]]> By: Me http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/comment-page-1/#comment-662 Me Thu, 09 Jul 2009 09:33:58 +0000 http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/#comment-662 <p>The picture is fucking disgusting.</p> The picture is fucking disgusting.

]]> By: Matt http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/comment-page-1/#comment-282 Matt Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:46:05 +0000 http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/#comment-282 <p>On the subject of testing private methods, I'm with Michael Feathers and <a href="http://evang.eli.st/blog/2008/10/27/testing-protected-and-private-methods-in-ruby" rel="nofollow">Pat Maddox</a>: If you feel the need to do it, you probably have a concern you need to separate into another class.</p> On the subject of testing private methods, I’m with Michael Feathers and Pat Maddox: If you feel the need to do it, you probably have a concern you need to separate into another class.

]]> By: Daniel Lucraft http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/comment-page-1/#comment-281 Daniel Lucraft Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:11:36 +0000 http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/#comment-281 <p>I agree in general, but in every particular case I end up too lazy to write specs that do things like model.send(:method<em>name) instead of model.method</em>name.</p> I agree in general, but in every particular case I end up too lazy to write specs that do things like model.send(:methodname) instead of model.methodname.

]]> By: JM http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/comment-page-1/#comment-280 JM Fri, 07 Nov 2008 10:02:33 +0000 http://blog.mattwynne.net/2008/11/07/your-private-methods-are-none-of-my-business/#comment-280 <p>Good point Matt! Most people even hardcore TDD programmers like myself tend to forget about protected and private methods ... The best way to remember them I guess is to feel the pain, like renaming a method and getting insulted by people impacted by your change ;-)</p> <p>Question, how do you test private & protected methods?</p> <p>To be as DRY as possible, I wrote this (source code extracted from http://github.com/garnierjm/dry-report/tree/master/spec/spec<em>helper.rb)</p> <p><code> def change<em>scope</em>of<em>method</em>to<em>public(clazz, method) eval("class #{clazz} public(:#{method.to</em>s}) end") end </code></p> <p>then before calling a private / protected method:</p> <p><code> change<em>scope</em>of<em>method</em>to<em>public(DontRepeatYourself::SimianRunner, :parameter</em>excludes) </code></p> <p>I did that because the way I TDD is with very small methods (3-4 lines max) and very long and expressive names (viva La Autocompletion!). Sometimes I stub these small methods to go straight to the behavior I want to implement. Most of the times, it's a 5-10 minutes job to write the specs for these tiny methods and make them pass ...</p> Good point Matt! Most people even hardcore TDD programmers like myself tend to forget about protected and private methods … The best way to remember them I guess is to feel the pain, like renaming a method and getting insulted by people impacted by your change ;-)

Question, how do you test private & protected methods?

To be as DRY as possible, I wrote this (source code extracted from http://github.com/garnierjm/dry-report/tree/master/spec/spechelper.rb)

def changescopeofmethodtopublic(clazz, method) eval(”class #{clazz} public(:#{method.tos}) end”) end

then before calling a private / protected method:

changescopeofmethodtopublic(DontRepeatYourself::SimianRunner, :parameterexcludes)

I did that because the way I TDD is with very small methods (3-4 lines max) and very long and expressive names (viva La Autocompletion!). Sometimes I stub these small methods to go straight to the behavior I want to implement. Most of the times, it’s a 5-10 minutes job to write the specs for these tiny methods and make them pass …

]]>