[Nmock-general] RE: NMock

[Paul B. <Pau...@vi...>]

It's not so much a problem as a possible inconvinience at times.  I =
think my sample below didn't properly set up the situation.  Let's say =
that I have method X that I want to test, but to get to the right state, =
I have to call methods A, B, C, D, and E, each of which result in calls =
to the Mock object.  It would be easier for me to not have to worry =
about counting the various method calls in that setup stage.  If I could =
wipe out my expectations, then I would only have to check the stuff that =
goes along with method X.  So there's nothing wrong with calling Verify =
multiple times, but I'd like not to have to think about verifying the =
results of methods A-E (say, because I've already verified that they =
work elsewhere). =20
=20
It's ultimately just a matter of convinience.
=20
Thanks!
=20
=20

-----Original Message-----
From: Owen Rogers [mailto:OR...@th...]
Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2004 3:37 AM
To: Paul Brousseau
Cc: nmo...@li...
Subject: Re: NMock



hi paul,=20
what sort of problem do you receive from nmock when you try to do this?  =
AFAIK, there is nothing stopping you from calling Verify as many times =
as you like.  why is it important to reset the expectations?  is there =
any problem with just accumulating them until the end of the test?=20
cheers,=20
owen.=20


---
R. Owen Rogers
ThoughtWorks Technologies (India) Pvt Ltd.

ThoughtWorks - Deliver with passion!

ThoughtWorks is always looking for talented people who are passionate =
about technology.  To find out more about a career at ThoughtWorks go to =
http://www.thoughtworks.com/career/.=20



	"Paul Brousseau" <Pau...@vi...>=20


03/07/2004 00:03=20

       =20
        To:        <jo...@th...>, =
<cst...@th...>, <or...@th...>=20
        cc:        =20
        Subject:        NMock



Hello!  I'm using NMock for a project, and I need it to do something =
that it doesn't appear to do at the moment.

I would like to be able to set up a dynamic mock and do several tests =
with it in a row, resetting the expectactions each time.  A stripped =
down example:

mockPageView.Expect("ZoomToFullPage");
controller.UndoZoom();
// Do assertions of zoom depth.
mockPageView.Verify();

mockPageView.Expect("ZoomToRectangle");
controller.ZoomToRectangle(new RectangleF(0, 0, 5f, 5f));
// Do assertions of zoom depth.
mockPageView.Verify();

mockPageView.Expect("ZoomToFullPage");
controller.UndoZoom();
// Do assertions of zoom depth.
mockPageView.Verify();

mockPageView.Expect("ZoomToRectangle");
mockPageView.Expect("ZoomToFullPage");
controller.ZoomToRectangle(new RectangleF(0, 0, 5f, 5f));
controller.ZoomToFullPage();
// Do assertions of zoom depth.
mockPageView.Verify();

This would all be in one logical unit test, as I'm interested in =
verifying a certain sequence of events (and related properties), but I =
want to make sure everything is going as planned along the way.  I would =
like Verify to clear the expectactions, OR make an explicit call to =
clear them.

I didn't see anything like this on the roadmap.  Are there plans?  If =
not, does this seem like the kind of thing that a reasonably clever =
engineer (myself) could hack up in day, without having previous =
expirience with the source?  And if so, would you accept a contribution =
back?

Thanks!