Skip to content

D
doctrine-dbal
Switch branch/tag
Find file
Normal viewHistoryPermalink
mock_objects_documentation.html 28.5 KB
Newer Older
zYne's avatar
--no commit message
df2b2ef8
 
zYne committed
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 
<html>
<head>
<META http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<title>SimpleTest for PHP mock objects documentation</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="docs.css" title="Styles">
</head>
<body>
<div class="menu_back">
<div class="menu">
<h2>
<a href="index.html">SimpleTest</a>
</h2>
<ul>
<li>
<a href="overview.html">Overview</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="unit_test_documentation.html">Unit tester</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="group_test_documentation.html">Group tests</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="server_stubs_documentation.html">Server stubs</a>
</li>
<li>
<span class="chosen">Mock objects</span>
</li>
<li>
<a href="partial_mocks_documentation.html">Partial mocks</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="reporter_documentation.html">Reporting</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="expectation_documentation.html">Expectations</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="web_tester_documentation.html">Web tester</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="form_testing_documentation.html">Testing forms</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="authentication_documentation.html">Authentication</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="browser_documentation.html">Scriptable browser</a>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
<h1>Mock objects documentation</h1>
<div class="content">
        <p>
<a class="target" name="what">
<h2>What are mock objects?</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                Mock objects have two roles during a test case: actor and critic.
            </p>
            <p>
                The actor behaviour is to simulate objects that are difficult to
                set up or time consuming to set up for a test.
                The classic example is a database connection.
                Setting up a test database at the start of each test would slow
                testing to a crawl and would require the installation of the
                database engine and test data on the test machine.
                If we can simulate the connection and return data of our
                choosing we not only win on the pragmatics of testing, but can
                also feed our code spurious data to see how it responds.
                We can simulate databases being down or other extremes
                without having to create a broken database for real.
                In other words, we get greater control of the test environment.
            </p>
            <p>
                If mock objects only behaved as actors they would simply be
                known as <a href="server_stubs_documentation.html">server stubs</a>.
            </p>
            <p>
                However, the mock objects not only play a part (by supplying chosen
                return values on demand) they are also sensitive to the
                messages sent to them (via expectations).
                By setting expected parameters for a method call they act
                as a guard that the calls upon them are made correctly.
                If expectations are not met they save us the effort of
                writing a failed test assertion by performing that duty on our
                behalf.
                In the case of an imaginary database connection they can
                test that the query, say SQL, was correctly formed by
                the object that is using the connection.
                Set them up with fairly tight expectations and you will
                hardly need manual assertions at all.
            </p>
        
        <p>
<a class="target" name="creation">
<h2>Creating mock objects</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                In the same way that we create server stubs, all we need is an
                existing class, say a database connection that looks like this...
<pre>
<strong>class DatabaseConnection {
    function DatabaseConnection() {
    }
    
    function query() {
    }
    
    function selectQuery() {
    }
}</strong>
</pre>
                The class does not need to have been implemented yet.
                To create a mock version of the class we need to include the
                mock object library and run the generator...
<pre>
<strong>require_once('simpletest/unit_tester.php');
require_once('simpletest/mock_objects.php');
require_once('database_connection.php');

Mock::generate('DatabaseConnection');</strong>
</pre>
                This generates a clone class called
                <span class="new_code">MockDatabaseConnection</span>.
                We can now create instances of the new class within
                our test case...
<pre>
require_once('simpletest/unit_tester.php');
require_once('simpletest/mock_objects.php');
require_once('database_connection.php');

Mock::generate('DatabaseConnection');
<strong>
class MyTestCase extends UnitTestCase {
    
    function testSomething() {
        $connection = &amp;new MockDatabaseConnection($this);
    }
}</strong>
</pre>
                Unlike the generated stubs the mock constructor needs a reference
                to the test case so that it can dispatch passes and failures while
                checking its expectations.
                This means that mock objects can only be used within test cases.
                Despite this their extra power means that stubs are hardly ever used
                if mocks are available.
            </p>
            <p>
                <a class="target" name="stub">
<h2>Mocks as actors</h2>
</a>
            </p>
            <p>
                The mock version of a class has all the methods of the original
                so that operations like
                <span class="new_code">$connection-&gt;query()</span> are still
                legal.
                As with stubs we can replace the default null return values...
<pre>
<strong>$connection-&gt;setReturnValue('query', 37);</strong>
</pre>
                Now every time we call
                <span class="new_code">$connection-&gt;query()</span> we get
                the result of 37.
                As with the stubs we can set wildcards and we can overload the
                wildcard parameter.
                We can also add extra methods to the mock when generating it
                and choose our own class name...
<pre>
<strong>Mock::generate('DatabaseConnection', 'MyMockDatabaseConnection', array('setOptions'));</strong>
</pre>
                Here the mock will behave as if the <span class="new_code">setOptions()</span>
                existed in the original class.
                This is handy if a class has used the PHP <span class="new_code">overload()</span>
                mechanism to add dynamic methods.
                You can create a special mock to simulate this situation.
            </p>
            <p>
                All of the patterns available with server stubs are available
                to mock objects...
<pre>
class Iterator {
    function Iterator() {
    }
    
    function next() {
    }
}
</pre>
                Again, assuming that this iterator only returns text until it
                reaches the end, when it returns false, we can simulate it
                with...
<pre>
Mock::generate('Iterator');

class IteratorTest extends UnitTestCase() {
    
    function testASequence() {<strong>
        $iterator = &amp;new MockIterator($this);
        $iterator-&gt;setReturnValue('next', false);
        $iterator-&gt;setReturnValueAt(0, 'next', 'First string');
        $iterator-&gt;setReturnValueAt(1, 'next', 'Second string');</strong>
        ...
    }
}
</pre>
                When <span class="new_code">next()</span> is called on the
                mock iterator it will first return "First string",
                on the second call "Second string" will be returned
                and on any other call <span class="new_code">false</span> will
                be returned.
                The sequenced return values take precedence over the constant
                return value.
                The constant one is a kind of default if you like.
            </p>
            <p>
                A repeat of the stubbed information holder with name/value pairs...
<pre>
class Configuration {
    function Configuration() {
    }
    
    function getValue($key) {
    }
}
</pre>
                This is a classic situation for using mock objects as
                actual configuration will vary from machine to machine,
                hardly helping the reliability of our tests if we use it
                directly.
                The problem though is that all the data comes through the
                <span class="new_code">getValue()</span> method and yet
                we want different results for different keys.
                Luckily the mocks have a filter system...
<pre>
<strong>$config = &amp;new MockConfiguration($this);
$config-&gt;setReturnValue('getValue', 'primary', array('db_host'));
$config-&gt;setReturnValue('getValue', 'admin', array('db_user'));
$config-&gt;setReturnValue('getValue', 'secret', array('db_password'));</strong>
</pre>
                The extra parameter is a list of arguments to attempt
                to match.
                In this case we are trying to match only one argument which
                is the look up key.
                Now when the mock object has the
                <span class="new_code">getValue()</span> method invoked
                like this...
<pre>
$config-&gt;getValue('db_user')
</pre>
                ...it will return "admin".
                It finds this by attempting to match the calling arguments
                to its list of returns one after another until
                a complete match is found.
            </p>
            <p>
                There are times when you want a specific object to be
                dished out by the mock rather than a copy.
                Again this is identical to the server stubs mechanism...
<pre>
class Thing {
}

class Vector {
    function Vector() {
    }
    
    function get($index) {
    }
}
</pre>
                In this case you can set a reference into the mock's
                return list...
<pre>
$thing = new Thing();<strong>
$vector = &amp;new MockVector($this);
$vector-&gt;setReturnReference('get', $thing, array(12));</strong>
</pre>
                With this arrangement you know that every time
                <span class="new_code">$vector-&gt;get(12)</span> is
                called it will return the same
                <span class="new_code">$thing</span> each time.
            </p>
        
        <p>
<a class="target" name="expectations">
<h2>Mocks as critics</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                Although the server stubs approach insulates your tests from
                real world disruption, it is only half the benefit.
                You can have the class under test receiving the required
                messages, but is your new class sending correct ones?
                Testing this can get messy without a mock objects library.
            </p>
            <p>
                By way of example, suppose we have a
                <span class="new_code">SessionPool</span> class that we
                want to add logging to.
                Rather than grow the original class into something more
                complicated, we want to add this behaviour with a decorator (GOF).
                The <span class="new_code">SessionPool</span> code currently looks
                like this...
<pre>
<strong>class SessionPool {
    function SessionPool() {
        ...
    }
    
    function &amp;findSession($cookie) {
        ...
    }
    ...
}

class Session {
    ...
}</strong>
&lt;/php&gt;
                While our logging code looks like this...
&lt;php&gt;<strong>
class Log {
    function Log() {
        ...
    }
    
    function message() {
        ...
    }
}

class LoggingSessionPool {
    function LoggingSessionPool(&amp;$session_pool, &amp;$log) {
        ...
    }
    
    function &amp;findSession(\$cookie) {
        ...
    }
    ...
}</strong>
</pre>
                Out of all of this, the only class we want to test here
                is the <span class="new_code">LoggingSessionPool</span>.
                In particular we would like to check that the
                <span class="new_code">findSession()</span> method is
                called with the correct session ID in the cookie and that
                it sent the message "Starting session $cookie"
                to the logger.
            </p>
            <p>
                Despite the fact that we are testing only a few lines of
                production code, here is what we would have to do in a
                conventional test case:
                <ol>
                    <li>Create a log object.</li>
                    <li>Set a directory to place the log file.</li>
                    <li>Set the directory permissions so we can write the log.</li>
                    <li>Create a <span class="new_code">SessionPool</span> object.</li>
                    <li>Hand start a session, which probably does lot's of things.</li>
                    <li>Invoke <span class="new_code">findSession()</span>.</li>
                    <li>Read the new Session ID (hope there is an accessor!).</li>
                    <li>Raise a test assertion to confirm that the ID matches the cookie.</li>
                    <li>Read the last line of the log file.</li>
                    <li>Pattern match out the extra logging timestamps, etc.</li>
                    <li>Assert that the session message is contained in the text.</li>
                </ol>
                It is hardly surprising that developers hate writing tests
                when they are this much drudgery.
                To make things worse, every time the logging format changes or
                the method of creating new sessions changes, we have to rewrite
                parts of this test even though this test does not officially
                test those parts of the system.
                We are creating headaches for the writers of these other classes.
            </p>
            <p>
                Instead, here is the complete test method using mock object magic...
<pre>
Mock::generate('Session');
Mock::generate('SessionPool');
Mock::generate('Log');

class LoggingSessionPoolTest extends UnitTestCase {
    ...
    function testFindSessionLogging() {<strong>
        $session = &amp;new MockSession($this);
        $pool = &amp;new MockSessionPool($this);
        $pool-&gt;setReturnReference('findSession', $session);
        $pool-&gt;expectOnce('findSession', array('abc'));
        
        $log = &amp;new MockLog($this);
        $log-&gt;expectOnce('message', array('Starting session abc'));
        
        $logging_pool = &amp;new LoggingSessionPool($pool, $log);
        $this-&gt;assertReference($logging_pool-&gt;findSession('abc'), $session);
        $pool-&gt;tally();
        $log-&gt;tally();</strong>
    }
}
</pre>
                We start by creating a dummy session.
                We don't have to be too fussy about this as the check
                for which session we want is done elsewhere.
                We only need to check that it was the same one that came
                from the session pool.
            </p>
            <p>
                <span class="new_code">findSession()</span> is a factory
                method the simulation of which is described <a href="#stub">above</a>.
                The point of departure comes with the first
                <span class="new_code">expectOnce()</span> call.
                This line states that whenever
                <span class="new_code">findSession()</span> is invoked on the
                mock, it will test the incoming arguments.
                If it receives the single argument of a string "abc"
                then a test pass is sent to the unit tester, otherwise a fail is
                generated.
                This was the part where we checked that the right session was asked for.
                The argument list follows the same format as the one for setting
                return values.
                You can have wildcards and sequences and the order of
                evaluation is the same.
            </p>
            <p>
                If the call is never made then neither a pass nor a failure will
                generated.
                To get around this we must tell the mock when the test is over
                so that the object can decide if the expectation has been met.
                The unit tester assertion for this is triggered by the
                <span class="new_code">tally()</span> call at the end of
                the test.
            </p>
            <p>
                We use the same pattern to set up the mock logger.
                We tell it that it should have
                <span class="new_code">message()</span> invoked
                once only with the argument "Starting session abc".
                By testing the calling arguments, rather than the logger output,
                we insulate the test from any display changes in the logger.
            </p>
            <p>
                We start to run our tests when we create the new
                <span class="new_code">LoggingSessionPool</span> and feed
                it our preset mock objects.
                Everything is now under our control.
                Finally we confirm that the
                <span class="new_code">$session</span> we gave our decorator
                is the one that we get back and tell the mocks to run their
                internal call count tests with the
                <span class="new_code">tally()</span> calls.
            </p>
            <p>
                This is still quite a bit of test code, but the code is very
                strict.
                If it still seems rather daunting there is a lot less of it
                than if we tried this without mocks and this particular test,
                interactions rather than output, is always more work to set
                up.
                More often you will be testing more complex situations without
                needing this level or precision.
                Also some of this can be refactored into a test case
                <span class="new_code">setUp()</span> method.
            </p>
            <p>
                Here is the full list of expectations you can set on a mock object
                in <a href="http://www.lastcraft.com/simple_test.php">SimpleTest</a>...
                <table>
<thead>
                    <tr>
<th>Expectation</th><th>Needs <span class="new_code">tally()</span></th>
</tr>
                    </thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
                        <td><span class="new_code">expectArguments($method, $args)</span></td>
                        <td style="text-align: center">No</td>
                    </tr>
                    <tr>
                        <td><span class="new_code">expectArgumentsAt($timing, $method, $args)</span></td>
                        <td style="text-align: center">No</td>
                    </tr>
                    <tr>
                        <td><span class="new_code">expectCallCount($method, $count)</span></td>
                        <td style="text-align: center">Yes</td>
                    </tr>
                    <tr>
                        <td><span class="new_code">expectMaximumCallCount($method, $count)</span></td>
                        <td style="text-align: center">No</td>
                    </tr>
                    <tr>
                        <td><span class="new_code">expectMinimumCallCount($method, $count)</span></td>
                        <td style="text-align: center">Yes</td>
                    </tr>
                    <tr>
                        <td><span class="new_code">expectNever($method)</span></td>
                        <td style="text-align: center">No</td>
                    </tr>
                    <tr>
                        <td><span class="new_code">expectOnce($method, $args)</span></td>
                        <td style="text-align: center">Yes</td>
                    </tr>
                    <tr>
                        <td><span class="new_code">expectAtLeastOnce($method, $args)</span></td>
                        <td style="text-align: center">Yes</td>
                    </tr>
                </tbody>
</table>
                Where the parameters are...
                <dl>
                    <dt class="new_code">$method</dt>
                    <dd>The method name, as a string, to apply the condition to.</dd>
                    <dt class="new_code">$args</dt>
                    <dd>
                        The arguments as a list. Wildcards can be included in the same
                        manner as for <span class="new_code">setReturn()</span>.
                        This argument is optional for <span class="new_code">expectOnce()</span>
                        and <span class="new_code">expectAtLeastOnce()</span>.
                    </dd>
                    <dt class="new_code">$timing</dt>
                    <dd>
                        The only point in time to test the condition.
                        The first call starts at zero.
                    </dd>
                    <dt class="new_code">$count</dt>
                    <dd>The number of calls expected.</dd>
                </dl>
                The method <span class="new_code">expectMaximumCallCount()</span>
                is slightly different in that it will only ever generate a failure.
                It is silent if the limit is never reached.
            </p>
            <p>
                Like the assertions within test cases, all of the expectations
                can take a message override as an extra parameter.
                Also the original failure message can be embedded in the output
                as "%s".
            </p>
        
        <p>
<a class="target" name="approaches">
<h2>Other approaches</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                There are three approaches to creating mocks including the one
                that SimpleTest employs.
                Coding them by hand using a base class, generating them to
                a file and dynamically generating them on the fly.
            </p>
            <p>
                Mock objects generated with <a href="simple_test.html">SimpleTest</a>
                are dynamic.
                They are created at run time in memory, using
                <span class="new_code">eval()</span>, rather than written
                out to a file.
                This makes the mocks easy to create, a one liner,
                especially compared with hand
                crafting them in a parallel class hierarchy.
                The problem is that the behaviour is usually set up in the tests
                themselves.
                If the original objects change the mock versions
                that the tests rely on can get out of sync.
                This can happen with the parallel hierarchy approach as well,
                but is far more quickly detected.
            </p>
            <p>
                The solution, of course, is to add some real integration
                tests.
                You don't need very many and the convenience gained
                from the mocks more than outweighs the small amount of
                extra testing.
                You cannot trust code that was only tested with mocks.
            </p>
            <p>
                If you are still determined to build static libraries of mocks
                because you want to simulate very specific behaviour, you can
                achieve the same effect using the SimpleTest class generator.
                In your library file, say <em>mocks/connection.php</em> for a
                database connection, create a mock and inherit to override
                special methods or add presets...
<pre>
&lt;?php
    require_once('simpletest/mock_objects.php');
    require_once('../classes/connection.php');
<strong>
    Mock::generate('Connection', 'BasicMockConnection');
    class MockConnection extends BasicMockConnection {
        function MockConnection(&amp;$test, $wildcard = '*') {
            $this-&gt;BasicMockConnection($test, $wildcard);
            $this-&gt;setReturn('query', false);
        }
    }</strong>
?&gt;
</pre>
                The generate call tells the class generator to create
                a class called <span class="new_code">BasicMockConnection</span>
                rather than the usual <span class="new_code">MockConnection</span>.
                We then inherit from this to get our version of
                <span class="new_code">MockConnection</span>.
                By intercepting in this way we can add behaviour, here setting
                the default value of <span class="new_code">query()</span> to be false.
                By using the default name we make sure that the mock class
                generator will not recreate a different one when invoked elsewhere in the
                tests.
                It never creates a class if it already exists.
                As long as the above file is included first then all tests
                that generated <span class="new_code">MockConnection</span> should
                now be using our one instead.
                If we don't get the order right and the mock library
                creates one first then the class creation will simply fail.
            </p>
            <p>
                Use this trick if you find you have a lot of common mock behaviour
                or you are getting frequent integration problems at later
                stages of testing.
            </p>
        
        <p>
<a class="target" name="other_testers">
<h2>I think SimpleTest stinks!</h2>
</a>
</p>
            <p>
                But at the time of writing it is the only one with mock objects,
                so are you stuck with it?
            </p>
            <p>
                No, not at all.
                <a href="simple_test.html">SimpleTest</a> is a toolkit and one of those
                tools is the mock objects which can be employed independently.
                Suppose you have your own favourite unit tester and all your current
                test cases are written using it.
                Pretend that you have called your unit tester PHPUnit (everyone else has)
                and the core test class looks like this...
<pre>
class PHPUnit {
    function PHPUnit() {
    }
    
    function assertion($message, $assertion) {
    }
    ...
}
</pre>
                All the <span class="new_code">assertion()</span> method does
                is print some fancy output and the boolean assertion parameter determines
                whether to print a pass or a failure.
                Let's say that it is used like this...
<pre>
$unit_test = new PHPUnit();
$unit_test&gt;assertion('I hope this file exists', file_exists('my_file'));
</pre>
                How do you use mocks with this?
            </p>
            <p>
                There is a protected method on the base mock class
                <span class="new_code">SimpleMock</span> called
                <span class="new_code">_assertTrue()</span> and
                by overriding this method we can use our own assertion format.
                We start with a subclass, in say <em>my_mock.php</em>...
<pre>
<strong>&lt;?php
    require_once('simpletest/mock_objects.php');
    
    class MyMock extends SimpleMock() {
        function MyMock(&amp;$test, $wildcard) {
            $this-&gt;SimpleMock($test, $wildcard);
        }
        
        function _assertTrue($assertion, $message) {
            $test = &amp;$this-&gt;getTest();
            $test-&gt;assertion($message, $assertion);
        }
    }
?&gt;</strong>
</pre>
                Now instantiating <span class="new_code">MyMock</span> will create
                an object that speaks the same language as your tester.
                The catch is of course that we never create such an object, the
                code generator does.
                We need just one more line of code to tell the generator to use
                your mock instead...
<pre>
&lt;?php
    require_once('simpletst/mock_objects.php');
    
    class MyMock extends SimpleMock() {
        function MyMock($test, $wildcard) {
            $this-&gt;SimpleMock(&amp;$test, $wildcard);
        }
        
        function _assertTrue($assertion, $message , &amp;$test) {
            $test-&gt;assertion($message, $assertion);
        }
    }<strong>
    SimpleTestOptions::setMockBaseClass('MyMock');</strong>
?&gt;
</pre>
                From now on you just include <em>my_mock.php</em> instead of the
                default <em>mock_objects.php</em> version and you can introduce
                mock objects into your existing test suite.
            </p>
        
    </div>
<div class="copyright">
            Copyright<br>Marcus Baker, Jason Sweat, Perrick Penet 2004
        </div>
</body>
</html>