Re: [MO-java-dev] Congrats for Dynamic Mocks

[Steve F. <st...@m3...>]

From: "Vincent Massol" <vm...@oc...>
> I've just started playing with Dynamic Mocks and it looks just great!
> >From the little I have seen so far, it looks much compact than EasyMock
> for example. It seems it is also more extensible and has already more
> features.

glad you liked it. Nat did most of the work.

> I had to read the source code and the MockTest class to understand how
> it works. When is a tutorial scheduled? :-)

um. when we get around to it...

> I also think that the default return value for the String class should
> be null and not "", as null is what anyone expects when an object has
> not been defined. Thus, I find myself adding:
>
>         mock.setupDefaultResult(String.class, null);
>
> in the setUp() methods of lots of my test cases.
>
> What do you think?

surely that would apply to any return type, not just strings? Are your test
for getting property values back?

S.