Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Code Reviews

Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Comments on Writing a testable console program

Post

Writing a testable console program

+4
−0

I have a class Foo that prints something to stdout and I want to be able to write tests for it.

So I created a trait to abstract println!, and gave it a prod implementation and a test implementation.

The test implementation simply writes the strings to a vector, so that tests can make assertions on the contents of the vector.

The problem is that since the MockIO modifies itself, I'm forced to write the method's signature as fn println(&mut self, s: &str) instead of fn println(&self, s: &str). Which in turns forces me to sprinkle muts all over the code.

// main.rs
mod foo;
mod io;

fn main() {
    let mut io_interface = io::StdIO{};
    foo::Foo::print_hello(&mut io_interface);
}

// foo.rs
use crate::io::{self, IO};

pub struct Foo {
}

impl Foo {
    pub fn print_hello<I>(io_interface: &mut I) where I: IO {
        io_interface.println("Hello, World!");
    }
}

#[cfg(test)]
#[test]
fn print_hello_world() {
    let mut mock_io = io::MockIO::new();

    Foo::print_hello(&mut mock_io);

    assert_eq!(mock_io.outputs[0], "Hello, World!");
}
// io.rs
pub struct StdIO;

pub trait IO {
    fn println(&mut self, s: &str);
}

impl IO for StdIO {
    fn println(&mut self, s: &str) {
        println!("{}", s);
    }
}


#[cfg(test)]
pub struct MockIO {
    pub outputs: Vec<String>,
}

#[cfg(test)]
impl IO for MockIO {
    fn println(&mut self, s: &str) {
        self.outputs.push(s.to_string());
    }
}

#[cfg(test)]
impl MockIO {
    pub fn new() -> Self {
        MockIO { outputs:vec![] }
    }
}

So my questions are:

  • is there a way to write MockIO so that I don't have to change the signature of IO::println() for the sake of the test class?
  • is there a better way to solve this problem altogether?

Feel free to point out any non-idiomatic code as well. I've done a fair bit of software development but am new to Rust.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

Any particular reason you're writing your own IO trait? (2 comments)
Any particular reason you're writing your own IO trait?
Moshi‭ wrote 11 months ago · edited 11 months ago

Any particular reason you're writing your own IO trait? Rust provides the Write trait which Stdout implements, so you can just pass that in

KevinG‭ wrote 11 months ago

No reason - I just didn't know better! Your version looks much simpler. I'll look into it. Thanks!