From: David A. <dta...@co...> - 2004-07-05 19:25:58
|
On further thought, it is possible to construct an adapter class to use this imaginary NMock2 in the NMock1 style. Just get on with the new version and not care about the consequences. ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Andersen" <dta...@co...> To: <nmo...@li...> Sent: Monday, July 05, 2004 10:50 AM Subject: Re: [Nmock-general] What shall we do for the next version > I REALLY like the mockObject.ExpectAndReturn("Method", value, "arg") syntax. > I hope that isn't going to be replaced with > mockObject.Expects(once()).Method("Method").With(eq("arg")).Will(returnValue > (value)). In my opinion jMock should change to be like NMock! > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Freeman" <st...@m3...> > To: <nmo...@li...> > Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 2:42 PM > Subject: [Nmock-general] What shall we do for the next version > > > > Here in NMock Castle, we're thinking about the next major version of > > NMock. We intend to release a version based on our experience with jMock > > (http://www.jmock.org), which is a much cleaner structure but is a > > significant change of API. > > > > The main issue at this point is how to manage the transition, in > > particular the choice of namespace since NMock is taken with the current > > library. There are some possibilities: > > > > - Package the current version in a strongly named assembly. Then the > > version of NMock could be changed with each VS project, but all of a > > project would have to be converted at once. > > > > - Call the new one NMock2. Personally I have problems with this because: > > I can't stand the cruft on the name especially when I believe the new > > version represents the long-term approach; and, every time we up the > > counter on the API, people will have to fix their tests even if there's > > no other change. > > > > - Move the old one to NMock0, and have the current version as NMock. Old > > code could be retrofitted with a 'using NMock0 as NMock' clause. In > > theory, this could be extended indefinately using numbered versions for > > deprecation. > > > > - Just get on with the new version and not care about the consequences. > > > > What's best for people. My only caveat is that I'd like to avoid the old > > 'make' problem, where the confusion between tab and space was > > perpetuated because they didn't want to annoy their (12) users at the > > time... > > > > S. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. > > Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - > > digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, > > unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com > > _______________________________________________ > > Nmock-general mailing list > > Nmo...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-general > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. > Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - > digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, > unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com > _______________________________________________ > Nmock-general mailing list > Nmo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-general > |