Re: [Nmock-general] Re: A mock log4net appender

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

On 27 Apr 2005, at 13:09, Thibaut Barr=E8re wrote:
> no answer so I assume it's too off-topic to be included in nmock ? (or
> maybe only interesting for my own needs!;)

not necessarily, just everyone's swamped...

This isn't my call, but I wouldn't be keen to see this included in the=20=

core package. There are a great many useful things out there that could=20=

be mocked out and we learned the hard way with the java mockobjects.com=20=

that this is a bottomless pit.

You also need to be careful about asserting within the TearDown, which=20=

should only be for cleaning up the fixture. In jUnit, at least,=20
exceptions are handled differently than from within the test itself.

S.

> 2005/4/25, Thibaut Barr=E8re <thi...@gm...>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wrote a mock log4net appender to ensure that my tests fails when
>> some errors are (sometimes silently) logged through log4net.
>>
>> Sample usage (just a starter):
>>
>> [SetUp]
>> public void SetUp()
>> {
>>         DOMConfigurator.Configure();
>>
>>         // create a mock log4net appender to verify that no error is=20=

>> outputed
>>         mockLog4netAppender =3D new MockLog4netAppender();
>>         // expect zero errors
>>         mockLog4netAppender.ExpectErrors(0);
>>         mockLog4netAppender.RegisterAppender();
>> }
>>
>> [TearDown]
>> public void TearDown()
>> {
>>         // verify that no error was outputed by log4net
>>         mockLog4netAppender.Verify();
>> }
>>
>> Do you think this idea could fit inside the nmock package ? I know
>> it's slightly OT, but if you think it can be useful or have other
>> remarks, please tell me.