Menu
▾
▴
dotnetmock-developer — For Active Developers of .NET Mock Objects
This list is closed, nobody may subscribe to it.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(13) |
Oct
(49) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(8) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
(42) |
Mar
(61) |
Apr
(36) |
May
(20) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(7) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(29) |
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(5) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
(1) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(15) |
Nov
(89) |
Dec
(85) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(17) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ma...> - 2005-02-01 17:36:50
|
Choy, Awesome. I saw that. I am going to remove the old *Namespace dll's from the main distro then. I program as admin ( I know, I know... ;) ), so maybe this is something that only admins can do. I will figure out a way to integrate the strong name into development. Sorry for the inconvenience. I will look into the MbUnit & csUnit support this week. I will concentrate on MbUnit, since csUnit appears to be abandoned. Great, I after all of this, I will prep a release. Then we can look into Roman's stuff more closely to see what should be merged in. Thanks, Griffin _____ From: Choy Rim [mailto:ch...@rc...] Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 3:26 AM To: 'Griffin Caprio' Cc: dot...@li... Subject: RE: [Dotnetmock-developer] RE: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Griffin, I've done the merge. I had a little trouble with the sn -Vr stuff in the build target. I pulled it out into a separate "skip-verification" target so that I could run it separately under an admin account. I don't normally develop under an admin account. Hopefully this is ok. I don't use MbUnit or csUnit so I not quite qualified to verify that the dynamic test framework binding works. I was wondering if you could verify at least one of them. A more comprehensive approach would be to make several example test projects, one for each framework. But that would take a while. I'm quite confident about how it will work for NUnit . but for the other two I can't be sure. Otherwise, I'll be off trying to see how to merge some of Roman's stuff. --Choy -----Original Message----- From: dot...@li... [mailto:dot...@li...] On Behalf Of Griffin Caprio Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 3:16 PM To: dot...@li... Subject: [Dotnetmock-developer] RE: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Choy, Ok, sounds good. If you don't have time, I can do it tonight. I don't have a problem with that. I would like to get a release out this weekend, as we have a couple of "cleanup" bugs going out, like being able to support NUnit 2.2 & signing the assemblies. -Griffin _____ From: Choy Rim [mailto:ch...@rc...] Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 12:46 AM To: 'Griffin Caprio' Cc: dot...@li... Subject: RE: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Griffin, Sounds great. I'll merge the branch pretty soon (like in a day or so). I'd like to take all the ITestFramework implementation resolution code out of Assertion and somewhere inside the DotNetMock.TestFramework namespace. But if I don't have enough time, I'll just merge it in, and clean it up in the trunk. --Choy -----Original Message----- From: Griffin Caprio [mailto:gri...@ma...] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 11:28 PM To: Choy Rim Cc: dot...@li... Subject: Re: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Choy, I have no problem doing this. Also, I looked over your RFE branch. It looks great. When would you like to merge it back into the head? After that, I will merge the two projects, then purge what we don't need. Sound good? Griffin http://blog.griffincaprio.com On Jan 26, 2005, at 12:14 AM, Choy Rim wrote: Griffin, I was wondering if you'd consider merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock. DotNetMock.Core only has ITestFramework in it. Although that means that our test framework implementation assemblies now depend on all of DotNetMock instead of just a single interface, it simplifies things for users. In fact, I'd like to deploy just one assembly for everything but that's too much change at once. This is a relatively small change and it does simplify the user experience quite a bit. It would make it easier for me to explain to others what they need to use DotNetMock. --Choy |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2005-01-29 09:26:23
|
Griffin, I've done the merge. I had a little trouble with the sn -Vr stuff in the build target. I pulled it out into a separate "skip-verification" target so that I could run it separately under an admin account. I don't normally develop under an admin account. Hopefully this is ok. I don't use MbUnit or csUnit so I not quite qualified to verify that the dynamic test framework binding works. I was wondering if you could verify at least one of them. A more comprehensive approach would be to make several example test projects, one for each framework. But that would take a while. I'm quite confident about how it will work for NUnit . but for the other two I can't be sure. Otherwise, I'll be off trying to see how to merge some of Roman's stuff. --Choy -----Original Message----- From: dot...@li... [mailto:dot...@li...] On Behalf Of Griffin Caprio Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 3:16 PM To: dot...@li... Subject: [Dotnetmock-developer] RE: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Choy, Ok, sounds good. If you don't have time, I can do it tonight. I don't have a problem with that. I would like to get a release out this weekend, as we have a couple of "cleanup" bugs going out, like being able to support NUnit 2.2 & signing the assemblies. -Griffin _____ From: Choy Rim [mailto:ch...@rc...] Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 12:46 AM To: 'Griffin Caprio' Cc: dot...@li... Subject: RE: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Griffin, Sounds great. I'll merge the branch pretty soon (like in a day or so). I'd like to take all the ITestFramework implementation resolution code out of Assertion and somewhere inside the DotNetMock.TestFramework namespace. But if I don't have enough time, I'll just merge it in, and clean it up in the trunk. --Choy -----Original Message----- From: Griffin Caprio [mailto:gri...@ma...] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 11:28 PM To: Choy Rim Cc: dot...@li... Subject: Re: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Choy, I have no problem doing this. Also, I looked over your RFE branch. It looks great. When would you like to merge it back into the head? After that, I will merge the two projects, then purge what we don't need. Sound good? Griffin http://blog.griffincaprio.com On Jan 26, 2005, at 12:14 AM, Choy Rim wrote: Griffin, I was wondering if you'd consider merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock. DotNetMock.Core only has ITestFramework in it. Although that means that our test framework implementation assemblies now depend on all of DotNetMock instead of just a single interface, it simplifies things for users. In fact, I'd like to deploy just one assembly for everything but that's too much change at once. This is a relatively small change and it does simplify the user experience quite a bit. It would make it easier for me to explain to others what they need to use DotNetMock. --Choy |
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ma...> - 2005-01-27 20:15:45
|
Choy, Ok, sounds good. If you don't have time, I can do it tonight. I don't have a problem with that. I would like to get a release out this weekend, as we have a couple of "cleanup" bugs going out, like being able to support NUnit 2.2 & signing the assemblies. -Griffin _____ From: Choy Rim [mailto:ch...@rc...] Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 12:46 AM To: 'Griffin Caprio' Cc: dot...@li... Subject: RE: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Griffin, Sounds great. I'll merge the branch pretty soon (like in a day or so). I'd like to take all the ITestFramework implementation resolution code out of Assertion and somewhere inside the DotNetMock.TestFramework namespace. But if I don't have enough time, I'll just merge it in, and clean it up in the trunk. --Choy -----Original Message----- From: Griffin Caprio [mailto:gri...@ma...] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 11:28 PM To: Choy Rim Cc: dot...@li... Subject: Re: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Choy, I have no problem doing this. Also, I looked over your RFE branch. It looks great. When would you like to merge it back into the head? After that, I will merge the two projects, then purge what we don't need. Sound good? Griffin http://blog.griffincaprio.com On Jan 26, 2005, at 12:14 AM, Choy Rim wrote: Griffin, I was wondering if you'd consider merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock. DotNetMock.Core only has ITestFramework in it. Although that means that our test framework implementation assemblies now depend on all of DotNetMock instead of just a single interface, it simplifies things for users. In fact, I'd like to deploy just one assembly for everything but that's too much change at once. This is a relatively small change and it does simplify the user experience quite a bit. It would make it easier for me to explain to others what they need to use DotNetMock. --Choy |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2005-01-27 06:45:45
|
Griffin, Sounds great. I'll merge the branch pretty soon (like in a day or so). I'd like to take all the ITestFramework implementation resolution code out of Assertion and somewhere inside the DotNetMock.TestFramework namespace. But if I don't have enough time, I'll just merge it in, and clean it up in the trunk. --Choy -----Original Message----- From: Griffin Caprio [mailto:gri...@ma...] Sent: Wednesday, January 26, 2005 11:28 PM To: Choy Rim Cc: dot...@li... Subject: Re: Merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock Choy, I have no problem doing this. Also, I looked over your RFE branch. It looks great. When would you like to merge it back into the head? After that, I will merge the two projects, then purge what we don't need. Sound good? Griffin http://blog.griffincaprio.com On Jan 26, 2005, at 12:14 AM, Choy Rim wrote: Griffin, I was wondering if you'd consider merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock. DotNetMock.Core only has ITestFramework in it. Although that means that our test framework implementation assemblies now depend on all of DotNetMock instead of just a single interface, it simplifies things for users. In fact, I'd like to deploy just one assembly for everything but that's too much change at once. This is a relatively small change and it does simplify the user experience quite a bit. It would make it easier for me to explain to others what they need to use DotNetMock. --Choy |
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ma...> - 2005-01-27 04:27:49
|
Choy, I have no problem doing this. Also, I looked over your RFE branch. It=20= looks great. When would you like to merge it back into the head? =20 After that, I will merge the two projects, then purge what we don't=20 need. Sound good? Griffin http://blog.griffincaprio.com On Jan 26, 2005, at 12:14 AM, Choy Rim wrote: > Griffin, > > =A0 > > I was wondering if you=92d consider merging DotNetMock.Core into=20 > DotNetMock. DotNetMock.Core only has ITestFramework in it. Although=20 > that means that our test framework implementation assemblies now=20 > depend on all of DotNetMock instead of just a single interface, it=20 > simplifies things for users. > > =A0 > > In fact, I=92d like to deploy just one assembly for everything but=20 > that=92s too much change at once. This is a relatively small change = and=20 > it does simplify the user experience quite a bit. It would make it=20 > easier for me to explain to others what they need to use DotNetMock. > > =A0 > > --Choy |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2005-01-26 06:14:14
|
Griffin, I was wondering if you'd consider merging DotNetMock.Core into DotNetMock. DotNetMock.Core only has ITestFramework in it. Although that means that our test framework implementation assemblies now depend on all of DotNetMock instead of just a single interface, it simplifies things for users. In fact, I'd like to deploy just one assembly for everything but that's too much change at once. This is a relatively small change and it does simplify the user experience quite a bit. It would make it easier for me to explain to others what they need to use DotNetMock. --Choy |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2005-01-25 07:21:04
|
Griffin, Please review the changes in branch RFE_1098585. They deal with dynamically generating an implementation of ITestFramework on startup. So far, I've written "stub makers" for NUnit and MbUnit. If the assembly environment variable is empty, we look for nunit.framework using Assembly.LoadWithPartialName(). If that fails we try MbUnit.Core. Then we dynamically generate an implementation and assign it to Assertion._testFramework. I've got to clean it up a bit. Perhaps find some ways of getting better test coverage. I've also got to implement the csUnit bindings. But you can get an idea of where I'm going. --Choy |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2005-01-08 21:01:22
|
Griffin, Here are some sketches of what I have in mind: * DotNetMock.Assertion will be modified to "detect" frameworks if the environment variables have not been set. The detection algorithm will check for nunit.framework first to make it as backward compatible as possible. * The list of frameworks to detect will be pre-compiled/configured in some global property like AutoDetectTestFramework.SupportedFrameworks[].AssemblyName. It will search in order for the (partial) assembly names like nunit.framework, MbUnit.Core, csUnit * It will then use the corresponding profile/stub-generator that does the actual work of dynamically creating a class that implements ITestFramework. * It will instantiate an instance of that generated class and assign it to Assertion._testFramework. I'm also thinking about whether we should do some exception mapping as well. Rethrowing everything as an AssertionException seems to lose something. Anyways, I'll branch off and let you know how it goes. --Choy |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2005-01-05 00:34:27
|
Griffin, All done. Ready for release! -----Original Message----- From: dot...@li... [mailto:dot...@li...] On Behalf Of Choy Rim Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 6:57 PM To: 'Griffin Caprio' Cc: dot...@li... Subject: RE: [Dotnetmock-developer] RFE_1001778 - Please review Griffin Sorry about the slow reply. I'll implement it right now. |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2005-01-04 23:57:10
|
Griffin
Sorry about the slow reply. I'll implement it right now.
--Choy
-----Original Message-----
From: Griffin Caprio [mailto:gri...@ma...]
Sent: Sunday, January 02, 2005 9:55 AM
To: Choy Rim
Cc: dot...@li...
Subject: Re: [Dotnetmock-developer] RFE_1001778 - Please review
Choy,
On Jan 1, 2005, at 11:49 PM, Choy Rim wrote:
Cool. Actually I wanted to do a few more things before you released it.
I realized it'd be cool to have AndRequire() work the same as other
predicates where null and other non-IPredicate's translate to
IsAnything and IsEqual respectively. But we can put that in the next
point release . when I get that expectation thread going.
No problem, since I didn't release last night :) When do you think you
could implement this?
From some of the commit comments, it looks like I've violated some of
your coding standards. Can you give me some guidance on exactly what
they are? I just followed the Spring.NET coding standards but am willing
to adopt whatever is the going convention. It looks like you prefer
l
No spaces between method definitions.
l
All fields on the top of a class definition.
l
Sometimes methods as capitalized and sometimes not .
l
Space at the beginning and end of a method argument list.
You go most everything right. I just added a few things:
1. All fields defined at top of class, with an _ prefix.
2. Public methods are Pascal cases, SomeMethod, and private & protected
methods are Camel Case, someMethod.
3. XML Comments for the public members. I turned this on for the VS.NET
projects, so the compiler will tell us when some are missing.
that's pretty much it. Not a big problem.
Well, from the commit emails that's what I gather. I'll write up a
little doc on it, put it in CVS.
I actually have a doc on it. I will put it up on SF tonight, in the
documents section.
So branch RFE_1001778 has been retired. RFE 1001778 has been closed. Now
we still need a header/license . :P
I think I will write a little ruby script to take care of this ;) Been
meaning to take that language for a spin.
-Griffin
--Choy
-----Original Message-----
From: Griffin Caprio [mailto:gri...@ma...]
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 6:00 PM
To: Choy Rim
Cc: dot...@li...
Subject: Re: [Dotnetmock-developer] RFE_1001778 - Please review
Choy,
Looks good! Great job.
I merged your branch into the head today. So, I should be packaging it
up for release today!
- Griffin
On Dec 29, 2004, at 6:22 PM, Choy Rim wrote:
Griffin,
I've coded the support for expectations that modify ref/out parameters
in branch RFE_1001778. The changes are ready for your review. I'm
itching to do a bit more refactoring, like eliminating the redundancies
between DynamicMockTests and DynamicOrderedMockTests. But most of the
refactorings I have in mind can wait until I merge this branch with the
trunk.
I've added two unit tests to DynamicMockTests (unit tests were also
added for the class generator code) which show how to use the feature.
I'll explain some of the basics here. Let's say we have a method that
takes a ref parameter:
void Increment(ref int index);
We can specify our expectation like so:
mock.Expect("Increment",
new Assign(2).AndRequire(new IsEqual(1))
);
That expectation will check the predicate first, then assign 2 to the
ref parameter. Take a look and let me know what you think. When you
bless it, I'll merge it into the trunk.
--Choy
p.s. I'm still wondering about the license and the commit emails . :-P
|
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ma...> - 2005-01-02 14:55:56
|
Choy, On Jan 1, 2005, at 11:49 PM, Choy Rim wrote: > Cool. Actually I wanted to do a few more things before you released=20 > it. I realized it=92d be cool to have AndRequire() work the same as=20 > other predicates=A0 where null and other non-IPredicate=92s translate = to=20 > IsAnything and IsEqual respectively. But we can put that in the next=20= > point release =85 when I get that expectation thread going. > No problem, since I didn't release last night :) When do you think you=20= could implement this? > =46rom some of the commit comments, it looks like I=92ve violated some = of=20 > your coding standards. Can you give me some guidance on exactly what=20= > they are? I just followed the Spring.NET coding standards but am=20 > willing to adopt whatever is the going convention. It looks like you=20= > prefer > > l=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 No spaces between method definitions. > > l=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 All fields on the top of a class definition. > > l=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Sometimes methods as capitalized and sometimes not =85 > > l=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 Space at the beginning and end of a method argument = list. You go most everything right. I just added a few things: 1. All fields defined at top of class, with an _ prefix. 2. Public methods are Pascal cases, SomeMethod, and private & protected=20= methods are Camel Case, someMethod. 3. XML Comments for the public members. I turned this on for the=20 VS.NET projects, so the compiler will tell us when some are missing. that's pretty much it. Not a big problem. > Well, from the commit emails that=92s what I gather. I=92ll write up a=20= > little doc on it, put it in CVS. > I actually have a doc on it. I will put it up on SF tonight, in the=20 documents section. > So branch RFE_1001778 has been retired. RFE 1001778 has been closed.=20= > Now we still need a header/license =85 :P I think I will write a little ruby script to take care of this ;) =20 Been meaning to take that language for a spin. -Griffin > =A0 > > --Choy > > =A0 > > =A0 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Griffin Caprio [mailto:gri...@ma...] > Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 6:00 PM > To: Choy Rim > Cc: dot...@li... > Subject: Re: [Dotnetmock-developer] RFE_1001778 - Please review > > =A0 > > Choy, > > Looks good! Great job. > > I merged your branch into the head today. So, I should be packaging=20= > it up for release today! > > - Griffin > On Dec 29, 2004, at 6:22 PM, Choy Rim wrote: > > Griffin, > > =A0 > > I=92ve coded the support for expectations that modify ref/out=20 > parameters in branch RFE_1001778. The changes are ready for your=20 > review. I=92m itching to do a bit more refactoring, like eliminating = the=20 > redundancies between DynamicMockTests and DynamicOrderedMockTests. But=20= > most of the refactorings I have in mind can wait until I merge this=20 > branch with the trunk. > > =A0 > > I=92ve added two unit tests to DynamicMockTests (unit tests were also=20= > added for the class generator code) which show how to use the feature.=20= > I=92ll explain some of the basics here. Let=92s say we have a method = that=20 > takes a ref parameter: > > =A0 > > void Increment(ref int index); > > =A0 > > We can specify our expectation like so: > > =A0 > > mock.Expect(=93Increment=94, > > new Assign(2).AndRequire(new IsEqual(1)) > > ); > > =A0 > > That expectation will check the predicate first, then assign 2 to the=20= > ref parameter. Take a look and let me know what you think. When you=20 > bless it, I=92ll merge it into the trunk. > > =A0 > > --Choy > > =A0 > > p.s. I=92m still wondering about the license and the commit emails =85 = :-P > > =A0 |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2005-01-02 05:50:06
|
Griffin,
Cool. Actually I wanted to do a few more things before you released it.
I realized it'd be cool to have AndRequire() work the same as other
predicates where null and other non-IPredicate's translate to
IsAnything and IsEqual respectively. But we can put that in the next
point release . when I get that expectation thread going.
From some of the commit comments, it looks like I've violated some of
your coding standards. Can you give me some guidance on exactly what
they are? I just followed the Spring.NET coding standards but am willing
to adopt whatever is the going convention. It looks like you prefer
* No spaces between method definitions.
* All fields on the top of a class definition.
* Sometimes methods as capitalized and sometimes not .
* Space at the beginning and end of a method argument list.
Well, from the commit emails that's what I gather. I'll write up a
little doc on it, put it in CVS.
So branch RFE_1001778 has been retired. RFE 1001778 has been closed. Now
we still need a header/license . :P
--Choy
-----Original Message-----
From: Griffin Caprio [mailto:gri...@ma...]
Sent: Saturday, January 01, 2005 6:00 PM
To: Choy Rim
Cc: dot...@li...
Subject: Re: [Dotnetmock-developer] RFE_1001778 - Please review
Choy,
Looks good! Great job.
I merged your branch into the head today. So, I should be packaging it
up for release today!
- Griffin
On Dec 29, 2004, at 6:22 PM, Choy Rim wrote:
Griffin,
I've coded the support for expectations that modify ref/out parameters
in branch RFE_1001778. The changes are ready for your review. I'm
itching to do a bit more refactoring, like eliminating the redundancies
between DynamicMockTests and DynamicOrderedMockTests. But most of the
refactorings I have in mind can wait until I merge this branch with the
trunk.
I've added two unit tests to DynamicMockTests (unit tests were also
added for the class generator code) which show how to use the feature.
I'll explain some of the basics here. Let's say we have a method that
takes a ref parameter:
void Increment(ref int index);
We can specify our expectation like so:
mock.Expect("Increment",
new Assign(2).AndRequire(new IsEqual(1))
);
That expectation will check the predicate first, then assign 2 to the
ref parameter. Take a look and let me know what you think. When you
bless it, I'll merge it into the trunk.
--Choy
p.s. I'm still wondering about the license and the commit emails . :-P
|
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ma...> - 2005-01-01 23:00:09
|
Choy, Looks good! Great job. I merged your branch into the head today. So, I should be packaging it=20= up for release today! - Griffin On Dec 29, 2004, at 6:22 PM, Choy Rim wrote: > Griffin, > > =A0 > > I=92ve coded the support for expectations that modify ref/out = parameters=20 > in branch RFE_1001778. The changes are ready for your review. I=92m=20 > itching to do a bit more refactoring, like eliminating the=20 > redundancies between DynamicMockTests and DynamicOrderedMockTests. But=20= > most of the refactorings I have in mind can wait until I merge this=20 > branch with the trunk. > > =A0 > > I=92ve added two unit tests to DynamicMockTests (unit tests were also=20= > added for the class generator code) which show how to use the feature.=20= > I=92ll explain some of the basics here. Let=92s say we have a method = that=20 > takes a ref parameter: > > =A0 > > void Increment(ref int index); > > =A0 > > We can specify our expectation like so: > > =A0 > > mock.Expect(=93Increment=94, > > new Assign(2).AndRequire(new IsEqual(1)) > > ); > > =A0 > > That expectation will check the predicate first, then assign 2 to the=20= > ref parameter. Take a look and let me know what you think. When you=20 > bless it, I=92ll merge it into the trunk. > > =A0 > > --Choy > > =A0 > > p.s. I=92m still wondering about the license and the commit emails =85 = :-P > > =A0 |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2004-12-31 23:42:56
|
Griffin, Awesome. Just tried it out. Looks good. --Choy > -----Original Message----- > From: dot...@li... [mailto:dotnetmock- > dev...@li...] On Behalf Of Griffin Caprio > Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 6:13 PM > To: dot...@li... > Subject: [Dotnetmock-developer] New mailing list > > All, > > I created a new mailing list for CVS commits. You can subscribe to it > via the project page: > > http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/dotnetmock > > - Griffin |
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ma...> - 2004-12-31 23:12:51
|
All, I created a new mailing list for CVS commits. You can subscribe to it via the project page: http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/dotnetmock - Griffin |
|
From: Griffin C. <gc...@us...> - 2004-12-31 22:57:41
|
Update of /cvsroot/dotnetmock/dotnetmock/DotNetMock/Dynamic/Generate In directory sc8-pr-cvs1.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv14701/DotNetMock/Dynamic/Generate Modified Files: Tag: RFE_1001778 ILUtils.cs Log Message: - Removed static constructor Index: ILUtils.cs =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/dotnetmock/dotnetmock/DotNetMock/Dynamic/Generate/Attic/ILUtils.cs,v retrieving revision 1.1.2.1 retrieving revision 1.1.2.2 diff -C2 -d -r1.1.2.1 -r1.1.2.2 *** ILUtils.cs 26 Dec 2004 23:58:53 -0000 1.1.2.1 --- ILUtils.cs 31 Dec 2004 22:57:31 -0000 1.1.2.2 *************** *** 16,24 **** public class ILUtils { - private ILUtils() - { - // just static functions here. - } - /// <summary> /// Return appropriate ldind <see cref="OpCode"/> for type --- 16,19 ---- |
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2004-12-30 00:22:43
|
Griffin,
I've coded the support for expectations that modify ref/out parameters
in branch RFE_1001778. The changes are ready for your review. I'm
itching to do a bit more refactoring, like eliminating the redundancies
between DynamicMockTests and DynamicOrderedMockTests. But most of the
refactorings I have in mind can wait until I merge this branch with the
trunk.
I've added two unit tests to DynamicMockTests (unit tests were also
added for the class generator code) which show how to use the feature.
I'll explain some of the basics here. Let's say we have a method that
takes a ref parameter:
void Increment(ref int index);
We can specify our expectation like so:
mock.Expect("Increment",
new Assign(2).AndRequire(new IsEqual(1))
);
That expectation will check the predicate first, then assign 2 to the
ref parameter. Take a look and let me know what you think. When you
bless it, I'll merge it into the trunk.
--Choy
p.s. I'm still wondering about the license and the commit emails . :-P
|
|
From: Choy R. <ch...@rc...> - 2004-12-19 21:15:45
|
Griffin, To start getting warmed up with the code, I decided to work on RFE 1001778, support out parameters. I made the request so it makes sense for me to work on it. I've created a branch called RFE_1001778. So far, I've only committed modifications to the ClassGenerator. I've got a ways to go before I figure out the least invasive way to support out parameters. I'll ask you to review the branch before I merge it into the trunk. Later when I feel comfortable, I'll set about implementing those "expectation threads". ... One thing that could help us work better together is if you set up the repository to send commit emails (like we have in Spring.NET). The directions on how to set it up are here: http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=772&group_id=1#scrip tsyncmail And you could ask Mark Pollack too. The documentation recommends starting a separate email list like dot...@li... and directing the commit emails there so that developers can choose to see the commits or not. This way you could review my work as I modify the code and give me immediate feedback. ... I think we should be attaching some sort of license to all the source code. I've only found one license and that was in Predicate.cs. So I've been using that one. But upon closer examination I realize that it's a log4j license which is probably not correct. How about we use the same one as Spring.NET? --- /* * Copyright 2002-2004 the original author or authors. * * Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); * you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. * You may obtain a copy of the License at * * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 * * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and * limitations under the License. */ --- I could enter a bug for this, and we can address it in a future branch with a perl script. --Choy |
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ma...> - 2004-07-23 21:57:41
|
This is fixed in CVS and will be included in the 0.7.0 release.
Just make sure to set your expectation correctly:
expectAndReturn( return, param1, new string[] { param2, param3} )
For example.
-Griffin
On Jun 29, 2004, at 10:51 PM, Kliment Mamykin wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have an interface that takes ParamArray as parameters, but I can not=20=
> make DotNetMock mock it up correctly - it throws a verification=20
> exception.
> Is it a bug or=A0am I doing something wrong?
> Thanks, - Kliment
> Here is the code:
>
> Private _database As IDatabase ' mock object to emulate DB access
> Private _mockDatabase As IMock ' object to control the mock
>
> <Test()> Public Sub DotNetMockFailing()
> _mockDatabase =3D New DynamicMock(GetType(IDatabase))
> _database =3D CType(_mockDatabase.Object, IDatabase)
>
> _mockDatabase.ExpectAndReturn("ExecuteNonQuery", 1, "SQL", 2)
> _database.ExecuteNonQuery("SQL", 2) ' verification exception here !!!!
> End Sub
>
> Public Interface IDatabase
> Function ExecuteNonQuery(ByVal sql As String, ByVal ParamArray=20
> params() As Object) As Integer
> Function ExecuteScalar(ByVal sql As String, ByVal ParamArray params()=20=
> As Object) As Object
> End Interface
|
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ma...> - 2004-06-30 12:59:19
|
you know, that's a good question.
I am not sure if DynamicMock was ever setup to handle variable length=20
parameters.
I will check on this tonight and get back to you tonight or tomorrow.
Thanks,
Griffin
On Jun 29, 2004, at 10:51 PM, Kliment Mamykin wrote:
> Hi all,
> I have an interface that takes ParamArray as parameters, but I can not=20=
> make DotNetMock mock it up correctly - it throws a verification=20
> exception.
> Is it a bug or=A0am I doing something wrong?
> Thanks, - Kliment
> Here is the code:
>
> Private _database As IDatabase ' mock object to emulate DB access
> Private _mockDatabase As IMock ' object to control the mock
>
> <Test()> Public Sub DotNetMockFailing()
> _mockDatabase =3D New DynamicMock(GetType(IDatabase))
> _database =3D CType(_mockDatabase.Object, IDatabase)
>
> _mockDatabase.ExpectAndReturn("ExecuteNonQuery", 1, "SQL", 2)
> _database.ExecuteNonQuery("SQL", 2) ' verification exception here !!!!
> End Sub
>
> Public Interface IDatabase
> Function ExecuteNonQuery(ByVal sql As String, ByVal ParamArray=20
> params() As Object) As Integer
> Function ExecuteScalar(ByVal sql As String, ByVal ParamArray params()=20=
> As Object) As Object
> End Interface
|
|
From: Kliment M. <km...@ya...> - 2004-06-30 03:52:05
|
Hi all,
I have an interface that takes ParamArray as parameters, but I can not make DotNetMock mock it up correctly - it throws a verification exception.
Is it a bug or am I doing something wrong?
Thanks, - Kliment
Here is the code:
Private _database As IDatabase ' mock object to emulate DB access
Private _mockDatabase As IMock ' object to control the mock
<Test()> Public Sub DotNetMockFailing()
_mockDatabase = New DynamicMock(GetType(IDatabase))
_database = CType(_mockDatabase.Object, IDatabase)
_mockDatabase.ExpectAndReturn("ExecuteNonQuery", 1, "SQL", 2)
_database.ExecuteNonQuery("SQL", 2) ' verification exception here !!!!
End Sub
Public Interface IDatabase
Function ExecuteNonQuery(ByVal sql As String, ByVal ParamArray params() As Object) As Integer
Function ExecuteScalar(ByVal sql As String, ByVal ParamArray params() As Object) As Object
End Interface
|
|
From: <her...@ec...> - 2004-02-02 09:50:14
|
dot...@li... escribio:
>> heh... i guess you'll have to work hard to do that.
>> :-(
>
> If it provides value...
Oh! I'm sure it does!
>> my work was a proof of concept. i'm not using cvs
>> to
>> record changes by now. i started porting from the
>> dotnetmock official distrib. alas, i rearranged the
>> directories sources to allow mass source changes
>> inside visual studio since that's our build tool in here.
>>
>> if you are still interested i can send you the
>> project.
>
> What do you mean by 'mass source changes'?
In csUnit theres a class called Assert which has methods
like .Equals, .Less, .ReferenceEquals and such. Besides,
the order of the parameters is different. So the idiom is:
Assert.{CompareMethod}(expectedObj, actualObj [,message]);
>> can't tell right now. i'm just starting to using
>> it.
>> still, one problem that i couldn't solve neither
>> investigate was the assert in
> <snip....>
>
> Ah, I see. I think the datatable.equals test was to
> see if the table passed in equals the table given.
>
> I am not sure that it does a 'data' equals, just a
> object reference comparision.
Are you sure they're supposed to be the SAME object?
Could you check in your version if an Assert.Same pass?
If so, there's a bug somewhere in my port because both
DataTable's have the same schema but they're definitely
different objects.
> ...
> One word of warning, the IDataParamterCollection
> interface does NOT specify a strongly type Add method,
> so you can't do this:
>
> IDbCommand.Parameters.Add( IDataParamter )
>
> for some reason, MS stopped short of defining the
> interface for IDataParamterCollection.
>
> It works fine if you do this:
>
> SqlCommand.Parameters.Add( SqlParameter )
>
> go figure....
ugh...
Thanks for the warning. Better now than later: less
code to refactor ;-)
> Also, check out the DotNetMock wiki at
> dotnetmock.sourceforge.net
>
> I am always putting new info up there, and you are
> welcome to add to it.
I had it bookmarked, thanks.
Regards,
-Hernan
________________________________________________________________________________________
Este mensaje ha sido analizado y protegido por la tecnologia antivirus www.trendmicro.es
|
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ya...> - 2004-01-31 02:26:42
|
That's great. if you send me your changes, I will see what I can do to make the TestFramework choice dynamic. DotNetMock is very much alive. The core framework is complete, so development has slowed. But lots of exciting stuff is coming in the area of Dynamic Mocks as well as more docs & examples. Anything you would like to see? Also, I am always curious about what people think are using DotNetMock and what they think? Thanks, -Griffin --- Hernán_Martínez_Foffani <her...@ec...> wrote: > > Hi DotNetMock's developers! > > Just ported DotNetMock to csUnit. I did it because > that's what we > use here. Are you still supporting it or is it an > abandoned > project? > > Regards, > -Hernan > > > ________________________________________________________________________________________ > Este mensaje ha sido analizado y protegido por la > tecnologia antivirus www.trendmicro.es > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 > Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and > Integration > See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in > Anaheim, CA. > http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn > _______________________________________________ > Dotnetmock-developer mailing list > Dot...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dotnetmock-developer ===== Griffin Caprio __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ |
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ya...> - 2004-01-31 01:14:57
|
That's great. if you send me your changes, I will see what I can do to make the TestFramework choice dynamic. DotNetMock is very much alive. The core framework is complete, so development has slowed. But lots of exciting stuff is coming in the area of Dynamic Mocks as well as more docs & examples. Anything you would like to see? Also, I am always curious about what people think are using DotNetMock and what they think? Thanks, -Griffin > --- Hernán_Martínez_Foffani <her...@ec...> > wrote: > > > > Hi DotNetMock's developers! > > > > Just ported DotNetMock to csUnit. I did it > because > > that's what we > > use here. Are you still supporting it or is it an > > abandoned > > project? > > > > Regards, > > -Hernan > > > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Este mensaje ha sido analizado y protegido por la > > tecnologia antivirus www.trendmicro.es > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 > > Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and > > Integration > > See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 > in > > Anaheim, CA. > > http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn > > _______________________________________________ > > Dotnetmock-developer mailing list > > Dot...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dotnetmock-developer > > ===== > Griffin Caprio > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. > Try it! > http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ > ===== Griffin Caprio __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ |
|
From: Griffin C. <gri...@ya...> - 2004-01-30 18:50:57
|
> heh... i guess you'll have to work hard to do that. > :-( If it provides value... > my work was a proof of concept. i'm not using cvs > to > record changes by now. i started porting from the > dotnetmock official distrib. alas, i rearranged the > directories sources to allow mass source changes > inside visual studio since that's our build tool in > here. > > if you are still interested i can send you the > project. What do you mean by 'mass source changes'? > can't tell right now. i'm just starting to using > it. > still, one problem that i couldn't solve neither > investigate was the assert in <snip....> Ah, I see. I think the datatable.equals test was to see if the table passed in equals the table given. I am not sure that it does a 'data' equals, just a object reference comparision. > > Also, I am always curious about what people think > are > > using DotNetMock and what they think? > > my main interest is the IDbConnection family > mock-object > classes (the ones that follows Steve Freeman's > proposal > for data base testing of our own project. Great, since many of those classes are in DotNetMock. One word of warning, the IDataParamterCollection interface does NOT specify a strongly type Add method, so you can't do this: IDbCommand.Parameters.Add( IDataParamter ) for some reason, MS stopped short of defining the interface for IDataParamterCollection. It works fine if you do this: SqlCommand.Parameters.Add( SqlParameter ) go figure.... > Regards, > -Hernan Also, check out the DotNetMock wiki at dotnetmock.sourceforge.net I am always putting new info up there, and you are welcome to add to it. Thanks, Griffin ===== Griffin Caprio __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! http://webhosting.yahoo.com/ps/sb/ |
92 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
