Re: [Boost-users] Comments / Advice on using Boost Test Library

From: Roman Neuhauser (neuhauser_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-16 13:41:16

# dgsteffen_at_[hidden] / 2006-09-15 10:49:46 -0600:
> Sohail Somani writes:
>  > > From: boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden] 
>  > 
>  > > > What I'd like to ask the Boost community about is this: how to go
>  > > > about unit testing private class methods.
> 
>  > #define private public
>  > #define protected public
>  > #	include "MyClass.hpp"
>  > #undef private
>  > #undef protected
>  > 
>  > This is permissable in unit tests, I would think.
> 
>  Yes, this is one of the alternate approaches I've been considering.
>  We've got the "Bad" and the "Ugly".  I'm still hoping the "Good" is
>  out there somewhere... :-)

    Extract bodies of those private methods to functors. Call those
    functors in/instead of your private methods, passing as arguments
    private data members that were accessed directly in the old methods.

    class somesuch
    {
        int x_, y_, z_;
        void doFoo() { x_ = y_ + z_; }
    }

    becomes

    struct Foo
    {
        int operator()(int x, int y) { return x + y; }
    }
    class somesuch
    {
        int x_, y_, z_;
        Foo foo;
        void doFoo() { x_ = foo(y_, z_); }
    }

    This doesn't solve the problem completely, but helps a lot and
    (AFAICT) always makes much sense from the design point of view,
    large private methods indicating that the class is mixing policy
    with mechanisms.

-- 
How many Vietnam vets does it take to screw in a light bulb?
You don't know, man.  You don't KNOW.
Cause you weren't THERE.             http://bash.org/?255991