From: dblack@...
Date: 2007-08-02T20:43:23+09:00
Subject: Re: Private methods not so private?

--1926193751-1278936812-1186055005=:5495
Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="1926193751-1278936812-1186055005=:5495"

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--1926193751-1278936812-1186055005=:5495
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

Hi --

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, "J=F8rgen P. Tjern=F8" wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Daniel Berger wrote:
>> [ .. snip .. ]
>> The advantage of allowing send to access private methods is that it
>> allows you to test private methods. :)
> Isn't that a Bad Practice (tm)? Private methods are mostly meant for the
> internals of a class, and a test should really only test how the class
> interacts with the rest of the world - right? (i.e. public methods)

No; you definitely want to test your private methods too.  First of
all, if you're writing a class, you need to test its internals;
nothing should be a "black box" for the tests.  Second, private
methods are actually available to the world, even without send.  They
just have to be called the right way:

   puts "Hi"
   class C
     attr_accessor :x
   end
   C.class_eval { define_method "y" }

puts, attr_accessor, and define_method are all private, but you'd
certainly want to test them if you had written them.


David

--=20
* Books:
   RAILS ROUTING (new! http://www.awprofessional.com/title/0321509242)
   RUBY FOR RAILS (http://www.manning.com/black)
* Ruby/Rails training
     & consulting:  Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com)
--1926193751-1278936812-1186055005=:5495--
--1926193751-1278936812-1186055005=:5495--