There are a lot of ways to test a web application: in-container testing using tools such as Cactus, full client-server testing using tools such as HttpUnit, out-of-container unit tests, and even manual tests.
I'm not a fan of any test approach that requires starting the application, because you won't want to do that on every build. So most of the tests for my service are unit tests, meant to run outside of the container. And although I knew that this would happen, I'm still amazed at how such tests push me toward decoupled code, even when I write the tests after the code.
The servlet's dispatch mechanism is a prime example. Going in, I knew that I wanted a RequestHandler
class for each operation. My first pass used an interface, with a getRequestHandler()
method inside the servlet class. However, the only way to test that method was to make it public or protected, and I'm not willing to violate encapsulation for testing. So RequestHandler
became an abstract class, and getRequestHandler()
became a static factory method. At the same time, I decided to instantiate a handler object per request, rather than reuse a table of singleton objects: the latter was easier to manage, but the former was easier to test.
Unit-testing servlet components means a lot of stubbing and mocking, and I decided to create a reflection proxy for the servlet request and response objects. I realize that there are existing mock implementations for these objects, but I figured that I wasn't using many of their methods and wanted to limit the use of third-party libraries (that's the topic of another post).
And that led to another observation: writing your own mock objects tends to reduce the number of places you touch those objects. If I have to mock both getParameter()
and getParameters()
, I'm going to think about why I call both methods, and probably use just one of them. This should translate to reduced chance of errors, in this case because I'll be cognizant of cases where there may be more than one parameter with the same name.
There's another effect that I'm seeing from writing for testability: I tend to use the Template Method pattern. A lot. Or perhaps it's simply a natural pattern for web services. I'll look at that more closely in the next post.
No comments:
Post a Comment