RE: [MO-java-dev] [New DynaMock] Why is there no match() method?

[Vincent M. <vm...@pi...>]

Hi Joe,

I thought the only difference between match*() and expect*() was that
expected methods were setting expectations that were verified when you
call the verify() method on the mock?

Also, expectAndReturn() does also setup return values, right?

Thanks
-Vincent (Still confused by the difference between match*() and
expect*() :-))

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Walnes [mailto:jo...@tr...]
> Sent: 14 May 2003 21:38
> To: Vincent Massol; moc...@li...
> Subject: Re: [MO-java-dev] [New DynaMock] Why is there no match()
method?
> 
> Vincent Massol wrote:
> 
> >Hi,
> >
> >There is an expect() method (replacing the old expectVoid()), but
there
> >is no match() method. Any reason?
> >
> >
> The only use of match() is to setup return values - so it's not needed
> for void methods.
> 
> -joe
>