The rabbit is out of the hat: I'm indeed working on a new book. It's called
"RabbitMQ Essentials" and is published by PackT Publishing. Yes, you're
reading right, after Mule, it's now RabbitMQ's turn! Clearly, I'm
specializing in writing about animal-named technologies.
(C) Kallisto Stuffed Animals
Why writing yet another book about RabbitMQ? After all, there are already
several very excellent books on the subject out there. I think Ross Mason
gave the best answer to this question on Twitter:
Let me further articulate the reasons why I decided to embark on this new
book project while the ink on Mule in Action is still wet:
RabbitMQ is a great piece of open source technology and I think it can use
all the coverage it can get. From the get go, RabbitMQ has been built with
the idea to make things right: it's a breeze to install and configure. Adding
extra plug-ins is a no-... (more)
To be able to do anything useful, an ESB must be configured with all sorts of
parameters, from endpoint connection URIs to message transformation scripts
to content-based routing definitions. Moreover, ESBs like Mule can host
custom components, which will process messages and perform user-specific
actions on them.
Deploying a new version of an ESB configuration raises the question of
whether it will break anything. How can we build confidence that everything
will be just fine? If unit testing did it for standard software development,
what can it do in the realm of the ESB? Since... (more)
In a recent blog post titled "The Limitations of TDD", Jolt Awards colleague
Andrew Binstock shared some reservations Cédric Beust has about TDD.
When a person of extensive experience like Cédric speaks about testing, you
pay attention. And I did.
Among the very interesting quotes from Cédric that Andrew has reproduced,
the following really struck me:
Another important point is that unit tests are a convenience for *you*, the
developer, while functional tests are important for your *users*. When I have
limited time, I always give priority to writing functional tests. Your duty
One of the very first CTO-grade decision I had to take in the making of
Snoget was to pick what would become our main transactional persistence
engine. Since we're using Erlang exclusively for our production servers, the
solution seemed easy: use Mnesia. But I settled for PostgreSQL.
At this point, anyone who's been dealing with O/R mapping (like Ted Neward
who said: "Object/relational mapping is the Vietnam of Computer Science"),
should cry fool: Mnesia would offer me persistence without any impedence
mismatch with the application runtime environment and I preferred a SQL
Like any test infected programmer switching to a new development platform, I
have spent my first days working with Erlang looking for my seams. Here, I am
talking about seams as defined by Michael Feathers in Working Effectively
with Legacy Code: "A seam is a place where you can alter behavior in your
program without editing in that place." As such, seams are key enablers for
unit testing as they allow you to redirect calls leading out of your SUT to
mocks or stubs or any kind of test double you tend to favor.
In object oriented programming, this is a given thanks to polymorphism a... (more)