Browse files

Merge pull request #29 from avdi/master

Update language comparing NullDB to ARBS and UnitRecord
  • Loading branch information...
2 parents 51a55c4 + 53d6ad3 commit 358d335785e93520a9f7a57019950d21bf73ccc1 Avdi Grimm committed Dec 14, 2012
Showing with 5 additions and 16 deletions.
  1. +5 −16 README.rdoc
@@ -96,22 +96,11 @@
NullDB is one way to separate your unit tests from the database. It
was inspired by the ARBS[] and
UnitRecord[] libraries. It differs
-from them in a couple of ways:
-1. It works. At the time of writing both ARBS and UnitRecord were
- not working for me out of the box with Rails 2.0.
-2. It avoids monkey-patching as much as possible. Rather than
- re-wiring the secret inner workings of ActiveRecord (and thus being
- tightly coupled to those inner workings), NullDB implements the
- same [semi-]well-documented public interface that the other standard
- database adapters, like MySQL and SQLServer, implement.
-3. UnitRecord takes the approach of eliminating database interaction
- in tests by turning almost every database interaction into an
- exception. NullDB recognizes that ActiveRecord objects typically
- can't take two steps without consulting the database, so instead it
- turns database interactions into no-ops.
+from them in that rather than modifying parts of ActiveRecord, it
+implements the same [semi-]well-documented public interface that the
+other standard database adapters, like MySQL and SQLServer,
+implement. This has enabled it to evolve to support new ActiveRecord
+versions relatively easily.
One concrete advantage of this null-object pattern design is that it
is possible with NullDB to test +after_save+ hooks. With NullDB, you

0 comments on commit 358d335

Please sign in to comment.