Re:Automated Unit Test Improvement Using Large Language Mode...
by Mawr on Saturday February 17, 2024 @05:11AM
(#39408116)
You shouldn't have setters in the first place. What's the point of encapsulation if anyone can just set properties at will?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Automated Unit Test Improvement Using Large Language Mode...
by noisy_boy on Saturday February 17, 2024 @07:51AM
(#39408999)
Sometimes the value you pass to a setter can go through additional logic to determine the final value to be set e.g.:
private int value1;
private int value2;
public void setValue2(int value2) {
this.value2 = value2;
}
public void setValue1(int value1) {
if (this.value2 > 0) {
this.value1 = value1 + this.value2;
} else {
this.value1 = value1;
}
}
Obviously this is a contrived example but if you have logic other than a simple "this.value = value", then you might want to unit test that bit.
Re:Automated Unit Test Improvement Using Large Language Mode...
by tom_ on Saturday February 17, 2024 @09:59AM
(#39410005)
Also useful if you want to add logging, or capture some metrics, or set a breakpoint.
Re:Automated Unit Test Improvement Using Large Language Mode...
by growse on Saturday February 17, 2024 @12:28PM
(#39411405)
Ah, the sound of people not using their type system properly.
Parse, don't validate.
Re:Automated Unit Test Improvement Using Large Language Mode...
by reactordev on Saturday February 17, 2024 @12:42PM
(#39411550)
But also don’t create AggregateNonNegativeInteger type when generics will do.