Skip to main content
9 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Mar 5, 2018 at 22:21 history edited Robert Harvey CC BY-SA 3.0
added 7 characters in body
Oct 18, 2016 at 21:42 history edited Robert Harvey CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 99 characters in body
Aug 4, 2016 at 15:47 history edited Robert Harvey CC BY-SA 3.0
added 1 character in body
Oct 30, 2015 at 13:07 comment added Binary Worrier +1: Yes, no magic in the C# version. It's a standard class, it has dependencies, they're all injected at one point, before the class is used. The class can be used with a D I container, or not. Nothing in the class says it IOC or "Automatic Dependency Injection" framework.
Oct 24, 2015 at 1:27 comment added Eric B. No - I'm not talking about test classes. I'm talking about production classes. It just happens that the example in the discussion group is a unit test, since the framework is a mocking/testing framework. (The whole discussion revolves around if the mocking framework should support constructor injection)
Oct 23, 2015 at 20:45 comment added Robert Harvey If you're only talking about test classes, it may not matter. Because, test classes.
Oct 23, 2015 at 19:57 comment added Eric B. If you look at the first post in that discussion you'll see I have almost the exact same defn in my Repo class.
Oct 23, 2015 at 19:48 comment added Eric B. Unless I read your post wrong, you are not actually looking at the example properly. My implementation of VeracodeService is nearly identical to the one you wrote (albeit in Java vs C#). The VeracodeServiceImplTest is actually a Unit Test class. The @Injectable fields are essentially mocked objects being inserted into the context. The @Tested field is the object/class with the DI Constructor defined. I agree with your viewpoint that prefers Constructor injection over field injection. However, as I mentioned, the JMockit author feels the opposite and I am trying to understand why
Oct 23, 2015 at 19:11 history answered Robert Harvey CC BY-SA 3.0