Re: [Nmock-general] Mock properties?

[Joe W. <jo...@th...>]

Sounds good to me.

-joe


Jim Arnold wrote:

>
>
>I had a look at this today.  SetupResult() does work, but as soon as you
>Expect() on the same property's setter, the mock's internal record of the
>property's expected signature is overwrittten (ie it expects the getter to
>be called with an argument).
>
>As I'm not that familiar with the internals of Method, Mock and co. I
>thought I would ask you lot for input before I fixed it.  My feeling is
>that properties should be treated differently to methods (not necessarily
>at the public API level, but internally).  Although properties are
>technically methods, they have, conceptually, two signatures.  At the
>moment, NMock doesn't care whether it's invoking a getter or a setter (it
>even strips the "get_" and "set_" from the names), and that's essentially
>the problem - calls to "get_Foo" and "set_Foo" are just recorded as a call
>to "Foo".
>
>So unless anyone has a better idea, I'll extend ClassGenerator and Mock to
>treat properties differently.
>
>Jim
>
>Thoughtworks
>
>
>
>
>|---------+----------------------------------------->
>|         |           Steve Freeman                 |
>|         |           <st...@m3...>             |
>|         |           Sent by:                      |
>|         |           nmo...@li...|
>|         |           ceforge.net                   |
>|         |                                         |
>|         |                                         |
>|         |           09/11/2003 11:53              |
>|         |                                         |
>|---------+----------------------------------------->
>  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>  |                                                                                                                              |
>  |       To:       "Jeremy Dunck (6433)" <JD...@ib...>                                                                      |
>  |       cc:       "Nmock-General (E-mail)" <nmo...@li...>                                               |
>  |       Subject:  Re: [Nmock-general] Mock properties?                                                                         |
>  >------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>
>
>
>Yep, it's a bug and there's already a test to prove it called
>
>   SetAndGetPropertiesDoesNotWorkWithSetupReturn
>
>For now, could you use ExpectAndReturn() ?
>
>S.
>
>Jeremy Dunck (6433) wrote:
>  
>
>>It's a 3rd-party binary.
>>
>>Fortunately, COM interop provides an interface when it generates the
>>wrapper class, so that was free.  :)
>>
>>Unfortunately, now I'm getting a different error.
>>
>>I've whittled it down to a failing test.  Perhaps I'm doing something
>>wrong, or perhaps we found a bug.  :)
>>
>>Thanks for the feedback.
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
>This SF.Net email sponsored by: ApacheCon 2003,
>16-19 November in Las Vegas. Learn firsthand the latest
>developments in Apache, PHP, Perl, XML, Java, MySQL,
>WebDAV, and more! http://www.apachecon.com/
>_______________________________________________
>Nmock-general mailing list
>Nmo...@li...
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-general
>
>
>
>
>  
>