nmock-two-dev — Discussion of development of NMock 2

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Nat P. <nat...@gm...>]

Yes.  The project is nmock (http://www.sf.net/projects/nmock).  The
CVS module is nmock2.

--Nat.

On 17/11/06, Charlie Poole <ch...@po...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Mike,
>
>
> > The beauty of open-source is that people can step up, so if there are
> volunteers I'll try to give what limited support I can.
>
> The link to browse the source on the web site doesn't work. Is the sf
> project 'NMOCK' the correct project?
>
> Charlie
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>
>
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Charlie P. <ch...@po...>]

Hi Mike,
 

> The beauty of open-source is that people can step up, so if there are
volunteers I'll try to give what limited support I can. 

The link to browse the source on the web site doesn't work. Is the sf
project 'NMOCK' the correct project?
 
Charlie

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Nat P. <nat...@gm...>]

Great.

You'll need a SourceForge login.  As Mike said, you might as well keep
it in the nmock project as a separate module.

You'll need a login to CCNet Live, the cruise server, from whoever
administers that.  However, it doesn't appear that CCNet Live is
building it, so it might be easier to set up your own build server.

What else needs doing to make it releasable, apart from putting a zip
with a 1.1.0 version number?

--Nat.

On 16/11/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
> > If anyone else is interested in taking over the project,
> > please step forward.
> >
> > --Nat.
>
> I would be willing to take over the project and work at getting a stable
> release out the door. Any relevant information I need to get started
> would be nice. If no one would have any objections I will contact the
> current owners of the NMock2 project on sourceforge and see if we could
> move development over there.
>
> -Richard Holden
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Charlie P. <ch...@po...>]

Hi Mike,
 
> Actually Nat, we completely rewrote the website, added a bunch of
documentation, found a Cruise instance to run the build and make us zip
files, and attempted to fix some of the confusion around exactly what "NMock
2" really is (there's an NMock2 project on SourceForge which is confusing
the hell out of people). 

Count me as one of those confused folks... I thought that the sf project was
the "real" NMock 2...
 
Charlie


  _____  

From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of Mike Mason
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 2:30 PM
To: NMock2 Development Discussion
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status


On 11/16/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote: 


The situation from my end is that I don't use .NET and don't intend to
in the foreseeable future.  Some ThoughtWorks people picked up
development and sponsored a release but that went nowhere beyond
putting "Release sponsored by ThoughtWorks" on the website. 



Yes, we haven't totally finished and there's a bunch of things we need to do
to get to a 1.0 release, but it's considerably closer to being a releaseable
piece of software than it was before.



If anyone else is interested in taking over the project, please step
forward.



The beauty of open-source is that people can step up, so if there are
volunteers I'll try to give what limited support I can. 

Cheers,
Mike.

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Nat P. <nat...@gm...>]

So what's happening?  Any timescales?

--Nat.

On 16/11/06, Mike Mason <mg...@es...> wrote:
> On 11/16/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote:
> > The situation from my end is that I don't use .NET and don't intend to
> > in the foreseeable future.  Some ThoughtWorks people picked up
> > development and sponsored a release but that went nowhere beyond
> > putting "Release sponsored by ThoughtWorks" on the website.
>
> Actually Nat, we completely rewrote the website, added a bunch of
> documentation, found a Cruise instance to run the build and make us zip
> files, and attempted to fix some of the confusion around exactly what "NMock
> 2" really is (there's an NMock2 project on SourceForge which is confusing
> the hell out of people).
>
> Yes, we haven't totally finished and there's a bunch of things we need to do
> to get to a 1.0 release, but it's considerably closer to being a releaseable
> piece of software than it was before.
>
> > If anyone else is interested in taking over the project, please step
> forward.
> >
>
> The beauty of open-source is that people can step up, so if there are
> volunteers I'll try to give what limited support I can.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>
>
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Nat P. <nat...@gm...>]

On the subject of nmock.org, currently www.nmock.org doesn't point
anywhere but nmock.org does.  It's pretty confusing.  Who owns the
domain?

--Nat.

On 16/11/06, Mike Mason <mg...@es...> wrote:
> On 11/16/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
> > I would be willing to take over the project and work at getting a stable
> > release out the door. Any relevant information I need to get started
> > would be nice. If no one would have any objections I will contact the
> > current owners of the NMock2 project on sourceforge and see if we could
> > move development over there.
> >
>
> I really suggest you don't try and move development to the NMock2 project --
> I've been trying to move in the other direction, better advertising the fact
> that NMock 2.0 is a CVS module in the NMock CVS repository. NMock.org points
> to the NMock website space on SourceForge, and there's other stuff you'd
> have to move too. Might be easier just to leave it where it is.
>
> In terms of stuff to do, there are patches archived on this list that people
> were interested in having, and people have asked for the assemblies to be
> strongly named (signed) so they can be GACified or multiple versions can be
> used. Those seemed to be the big things, but I'm sure more people have ideas
> too.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>
>
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Mike M. <mg...@es...>]

On 11/16/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
>
> I would be willing to take over the project and work at getting a stable
> release out the door. Any relevant information I need to get started
> would be nice. If no one would have any objections I will contact the
> current owners of the NMock2 project on sourceforge and see if we could
> move development over there.
>

I really suggest you don't try and move development to the NMock2 project --
I've been trying to move in the other direction, better advertising the fact
that NMock 2.0 is a CVS module in the NMock CVS repository. NMock.org points
to the NMock website space on SourceForge, and there's other stuff you'd
have to move too. Might be easier just to leave it where it is.

In terms of stuff to do, there are patches archived on this list that people
were interested in having, and people have asked for the assemblies to be
strongly named (signed) so they can be GACified or multiple versions can be
used. Those seemed to be the big things, but I'm sure more people have ideas
too.

Cheers,
Mike.

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Mike M. <mg...@es...>]

On 11/16/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote:
>
> The situation from my end is that I don't use .NET and don't intend to
> in the foreseeable future.  Some ThoughtWorks people picked up
> development and sponsored a release but that went nowhere beyond
> putting "Release sponsored by ThoughtWorks" on the website.


Actually Nat, we completely rewrote the website, added a bunch of
documentation, found a Cruise instance to run the build and make us zip
files, and attempted to fix some of the confusion around exactly what "NMock
2" really is (there's an NMock2 project on SourceForge which is confusing
the hell out of people).

Yes, we haven't totally finished and there's a bunch of things we need to do
to get to a 1.0 release, but it's considerably closer to being a releaseable
piece of software than it was before.

If anyone else is interested in taking over the project, please step
> forward.
>

The beauty of open-source is that people can step up, so if there are
volunteers I'll try to give what limited support I can.

Cheers,
Mike.

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Richard H. <Ric...@qu...>]

> If anyone else is interested in taking over the project,=20
> please step forward.
>=20
> --Nat.

I would be willing to take over the project and work at getting a stable
release out the door. Any relevant information I need to get started
would be nice. If no one would have any objections I will contact the
current owners of the NMock2 project on sourceforge and see if we could
move development over there.

-Richard Holden

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Steve M. <Ste...@ty...>]

I've never run an open source project, so I'm hesitant to volunteer to
take over.  But I can work issues and help to evaluate patches.

-----Original Message-----
From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of
Charlie Poole
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 12:25 PM
To: 'NMock2 Development Discussion'
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

Hi Nat,

Ah, too bad. I have a sufficiently full plate myself, so I'm not
volunteering, but I would like to ship a full-featured mock
implementation with NUnit, in lieu of the toy implementation I=20
threw together over a weekend a few years ago.

Guess I'll stick with what I have, at least till NUnit 3.0.

Charlie=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nmo...@li...=20
> [mailto:nmo...@li...] On=20
> Behalf Of Nat Pryce
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:28 AM
> To: NMock2 Development Discussion
> Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
>=20
> The situation from my end is that I don't use .NET and don't=20
> intend to in the foreseeable future.  Some ThoughtWorks=20
> people picked up development and sponsored a release but that=20
> went nowhere beyond putting "Release sponsored by=20
> ThoughtWorks" on the website.
>=20
> If anyone else is interested in taking over the project,=20
> please step forward.
>=20
> --Nat.
>=20
> On 16/11/06, Steve Mitcham <Ste...@ty...> wrote:
> > I don't know if I'm the only one to have submitted patches to the=20
> > list, only to have them be completely ignored.  I can understand=20
> > getting a patch rejected, but an explanation for why the=20
> patch wasn't=20
> > accepted would be useful.
> >
> > I use NMock2 extensively in my organization and essentially, I'm=20
> > forced to maintain my own version to handle the problems=20
> with adding=20
> > NMock2 mocks to a ServiceContainer implementation.
> >
> > After 2 attempts at submitting the patch for the fix, and several=20
> > message to the list asking for status, I basically gave up.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nmo...@li...
> > [mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of=20
> > Charlie Poole
> > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:59 AM
> > To: 'NMock2 Development Discussion'
> > Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
> >
> > Hi Nat,
> >
> > So does that imply I should stop waiting for a "stable" NMock2 to=20
> > package with NUnit?
> >
> > Would it make more sense to just build it from source, do you think?
> >
> > Charlie
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nmo...@li...
> > > [mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of=20
> > > Nat Pryce
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:44 AM
> > > To: NMock2 Development Discussion
> > > Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
> > >
> > > I don't know what's happened to the ThoughtWorks project=20
> to package=20
> > > a convenient NMock 2 release.  I assume it's petered out.
> > >
> > > However, in your case I don't think it matters.  NMock 2 is
> > > *designed* to be extensible.  You are meant to write your own=20
> > > matchers to meet your own testing requirements and those matchers=20
> > > can be seamlessly integrated into NMock 2's "domain specific=20
> > > language" API so that your tests remain easy to read.
> > >
> > > --Nat
> > >
> > > On 15/11/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
> > > > Is NMock2 dead? We have just started a TDD project here at
> > > work and I
> > > > recommended NMock2 because it did most of what I thought we
> > > needed. I
> > > > am now running into scenarios where the current set of=20
> matchers is=20
> > > > inadequate, including cases where I have seen patches in
> > > the mailing
> > > > lists. I am trying to determine whether to continue using
> > > NMock2 or to
> > > > recommend switching to another .Net mock object framework. I am=20
> > > > willing to contribute patches and time to NMock2 if it is
> > > going to continue.
> > > >
> > > > -Richard Holden
> > > >
> > > >
> > >=20
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > --
> > > > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join=20
> > > > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the=20
> chance to share=20
> > > > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys
> > > - and earn
> > > > cash
> > > >
> > >=20
> =
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
D
> > > EV
> > > > DEV _______________________________________________
> > > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > > NMo...@li...
> > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > > >
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > -----------
> > > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join=20
> > > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance=20
> to share=20
> > > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and=20
> > > earn cash=20
> > > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge
> > > &CID=3DDEVDEV
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > NMo...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >=20
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > -
> > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join=20
> > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share=20
> > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys=20
> - and earn=20
> > cash=20
> >=20
> =
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEV
> > DE
> > V
> > _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
> >=20
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join=20
> > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share=20
> > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys=20
> - and earn=20
> > cash=20
> >=20
> =
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEV
> > DEV _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
>=20
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join=20
> SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to=20
> share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief=20
> surveys - and earn cash=20
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge
> &CID=3DDEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>=20



------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDE
V
_______________________________________________
NMock-two-dev mailing list
NMo...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Charlie P. <ch...@po...>]

Hi Nat,

Ah, too bad. I have a sufficiently full plate myself, so I'm not
volunteering, but I would like to ship a full-featured mock
implementation with NUnit, in lieu of the toy implementation I 
threw together over a weekend a few years ago.

Guess I'll stick with what I have, at least till NUnit 3.0.

Charlie 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nmo...@li... 
> [mailto:nmo...@li...] On 
> Behalf Of Nat Pryce
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:28 AM
> To: NMock2 Development Discussion
> Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
> 
> The situation from my end is that I don't use .NET and don't 
> intend to in the foreseeable future.  Some ThoughtWorks 
> people picked up development and sponsored a release but that 
> went nowhere beyond putting "Release sponsored by 
> ThoughtWorks" on the website.
> 
> If anyone else is interested in taking over the project, 
> please step forward.
> 
> --Nat.
> 
> On 16/11/06, Steve Mitcham <Ste...@ty...> wrote:
> > I don't know if I'm the only one to have submitted patches to the 
> > list, only to have them be completely ignored.  I can understand 
> > getting a patch rejected, but an explanation for why the 
> patch wasn't 
> > accepted would be useful.
> >
> > I use NMock2 extensively in my organization and essentially, I'm 
> > forced to maintain my own version to handle the problems 
> with adding 
> > NMock2 mocks to a ServiceContainer implementation.
> >
> > After 2 attempts at submitting the patch for the fix, and several 
> > message to the list asking for status, I basically gave up.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nmo...@li...
> > [mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of 
> > Charlie Poole
> > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:59 AM
> > To: 'NMock2 Development Discussion'
> > Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
> >
> > Hi Nat,
> >
> > So does that imply I should stop waiting for a "stable" NMock2 to 
> > package with NUnit?
> >
> > Would it make more sense to just build it from source, do you think?
> >
> > Charlie
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: nmo...@li...
> > > [mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of 
> > > Nat Pryce
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:44 AM
> > > To: NMock2 Development Discussion
> > > Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
> > >
> > > I don't know what's happened to the ThoughtWorks project 
> to package 
> > > a convenient NMock 2 release.  I assume it's petered out.
> > >
> > > However, in your case I don't think it matters.  NMock 2 is
> > > *designed* to be extensible.  You are meant to write your own 
> > > matchers to meet your own testing requirements and those matchers 
> > > can be seamlessly integrated into NMock 2's "domain specific 
> > > language" API so that your tests remain easy to read.
> > >
> > > --Nat
> > >
> > > On 15/11/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
> > > > Is NMock2 dead? We have just started a TDD project here at
> > > work and I
> > > > recommended NMock2 because it did most of what I thought we
> > > needed. I
> > > > am now running into scenarios where the current set of 
> matchers is 
> > > > inadequate, including cases where I have seen patches in
> > > the mailing
> > > > lists. I am trying to determine whether to continue using
> > > NMock2 or to
> > > > recommend switching to another .Net mock object framework. I am 
> > > > willing to contribute patches and time to NMock2 if it is
> > > going to continue.
> > > >
> > > > -Richard Holden
> > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > --
> > > > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join 
> > > > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the 
> chance to share 
> > > > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys
> > > - and earn
> > > > cash
> > > >
> > > 
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=D
> > > EV
> > > > DEV _______________________________________________
> > > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > > NMo...@li...
> > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > > >
> > >
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > > -----------
> > > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join 
> > > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance 
> to share 
> > > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and 
> > > earn cash 
> > > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge
> > > &CID=DEVDEV
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > NMo...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --
> > -
> > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join 
> > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share 
> > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys 
> - and earn 
> > cash 
> > 
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEV
> > DE
> > V
> > _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join 
> > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share 
> > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys 
> - and earn 
> > cash 
> > 
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEV
> > DEV _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join 
> SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to 
> share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief 
> surveys - and earn cash 
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge
> &CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> 

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Nat P. <nat...@gm...>]

The situation from my end is that I don't use .NET and don't intend to
in the foreseeable future.  Some ThoughtWorks people picked up
development and sponsored a release but that went nowhere beyond
putting "Release sponsored by ThoughtWorks" on the website.

If anyone else is interested in taking over the project, please step forward.

--Nat.

On 16/11/06, Steve Mitcham <Ste...@ty...> wrote:
> I don't know if I'm the only one to have submitted patches to the list,
> only to have them be completely ignored.  I can understand getting a
> patch rejected, but an explanation for why the patch wasn't accepted
> would be useful.
>
> I use NMock2 extensively in my organization and essentially, I'm forced
> to maintain my own version to handle the problems with adding NMock2
> mocks to a ServiceContainer implementation.
>
> After 2 attempts at submitting the patch for the fix, and several
> message to the list asking for status, I basically gave up.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nmo...@li...
> [mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of
> Charlie Poole
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:59 AM
> To: 'NMock2 Development Discussion'
> Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
>
> Hi Nat,
>
> So does that imply I should stop waiting for a "stable" NMock2 to
> package
> with NUnit?
>
> Would it make more sense to just build it from source, do you think?
>
> Charlie
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nmo...@li...
> > [mailto:nmo...@li...] On
> > Behalf Of Nat Pryce
> > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:44 AM
> > To: NMock2 Development Discussion
> > Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
> >
> > I don't know what's happened to the ThoughtWorks project to
> > package a convenient NMock 2 release.  I assume it's petered out.
> >
> > However, in your case I don't think it matters.  NMock 2 is
> > *designed* to be extensible.  You are meant to write your own
> > matchers to meet your own testing requirements and those
> > matchers can be seamlessly integrated into NMock 2's "domain
> > specific language" API so that your tests remain easy to read.
> >
> > --Nat
> >
> > On 15/11/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
> > > Is NMock2 dead? We have just started a TDD project here at
> > work and I
> > > recommended NMock2 because it did most of what I thought we
> > needed. I
> > > am now running into scenarios where the current set of matchers is
> > > inadequate, including cases where I have seen patches in
> > the mailing
> > > lists. I am trying to determine whether to continue using
> > NMock2 or to
> > > recommend switching to another .Net mock object framework. I am
> > > willing to contribute patches and time to NMock2 if it is
> > going to continue.
> > >
> > > -Richard Holden
> > >
> > >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join
> > > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> > > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys
> > - and earn
> > > cash
> > >
> > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEV
> > > DEV _______________________________________________
> > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > NMo...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------
> > Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join
> > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to
> > share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief
> > surveys - and earn cash
> > http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge
> > &CID=DEVDEV
> > _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
> your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDE
> V
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Steve M. <Ste...@ty...>]

I don't know if I'm the only one to have submitted patches to the list,
only to have them be completely ignored.  I can understand getting a
patch rejected, but an explanation for why the patch wasn't accepted
would be useful.

I use NMock2 extensively in my organization and essentially, I'm forced
to maintain my own version to handle the problems with adding NMock2
mocks to a ServiceContainer implementation.

After 2 attempts at submitting the patch for the fix, and several
message to the list asking for status, I basically gave up.

-----Original Message-----
From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of
Charlie Poole
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:59 AM
To: 'NMock2 Development Discussion'
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

Hi Nat,

So does that imply I should stop waiting for a "stable" NMock2 to
package
with NUnit?

Would it make more sense to just build it from source, do you think?

Charlie=20

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nmo...@li...=20
> [mailto:nmo...@li...] On=20
> Behalf Of Nat Pryce
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:44 AM
> To: NMock2 Development Discussion
> Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
>=20
> I don't know what's happened to the ThoughtWorks project to=20
> package a convenient NMock 2 release.  I assume it's petered out.
>=20
> However, in your case I don't think it matters.  NMock 2 is=20
> *designed* to be extensible.  You are meant to write your own=20
> matchers to meet your own testing requirements and those=20
> matchers can be seamlessly integrated into NMock 2's "domain=20
> specific language" API so that your tests remain easy to read.
>=20
> --Nat
>=20
> On 15/11/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
> > Is NMock2 dead? We have just started a TDD project here at=20
> work and I=20
> > recommended NMock2 because it did most of what I thought we=20
> needed. I=20
> > am now running into scenarios where the current set of matchers is=20
> > inadequate, including cases where I have seen patches in=20
> the mailing=20
> > lists. I am trying to determine whether to continue using=20
> NMock2 or to=20
> > recommend switching to another .Net mock object framework. I am=20
> > willing to contribute patches and time to NMock2 if it is=20
> going to continue.
> >
> > -Richard Holden
> >
> >=20
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join=20
> > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share=20
> > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys=20
> - and earn=20
> > cash=20
> >=20
> =
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEV
> > DEV _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
>=20
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join=20
> SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to=20
> share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief=20
> surveys - and earn cash=20
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge
> &CID=3DDEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>=20



------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share
your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=3Djoin.php&p=3Dsourceforge&CID=3D=
DEVDE
V
_______________________________________________
NMock-two-dev mailing list
NMo...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Charlie P. <ch...@po...>]

Hi Nat,

So does that imply I should stop waiting for a "stable" NMock2 to package
with NUnit?

Would it make more sense to just build it from source, do you think?

Charlie 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: nmo...@li... 
> [mailto:nmo...@li...] On 
> Behalf Of Nat Pryce
> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 5:44 AM
> To: NMock2 Development Discussion
> Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status
> 
> I don't know what's happened to the ThoughtWorks project to 
> package a convenient NMock 2 release.  I assume it's petered out.
> 
> However, in your case I don't think it matters.  NMock 2 is 
> *designed* to be extensible.  You are meant to write your own 
> matchers to meet your own testing requirements and those 
> matchers can be seamlessly integrated into NMock 2's "domain 
> specific language" API so that your tests remain easy to read.
> 
> --Nat
> 
> On 15/11/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
> > Is NMock2 dead? We have just started a TDD project here at 
> work and I 
> > recommended NMock2 because it did most of what I thought we 
> needed. I 
> > am now running into scenarios where the current set of matchers is 
> > inadequate, including cases where I have seen patches in 
> the mailing 
> > lists. I am trying to determine whether to continue using 
> NMock2 or to 
> > recommend switching to another .Net mock object framework. I am 
> > willing to contribute patches and time to NMock2 if it is 
> going to continue.
> >
> > -Richard Holden
> >
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > --- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join 
> > SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share 
> > your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys 
> - and earn 
> > cash 
> > 
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEV
> > DEV _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join 
> SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to 
> share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief 
> surveys - and earn cash 
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge
> &CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> 

Re: [NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Nat P. <nat...@gm...>]

I don't know what's happened to the ThoughtWorks project to package a
convenient NMock 2 release.  I assume it's petered out.

However, in your case I don't think it matters.  NMock 2 is *designed*
to be extensible.  You are meant to write your own matchers to meet
your own testing requirements and those matchers can be seamlessly
integrated into NMock 2's "domain specific language" API so that your
tests remain easy to read.

--Nat

On 15/11/06, Richard Holden <Ric...@qu...> wrote:
> Is NMock2 dead? We have just started a TDD project here at work and I
> recommended NMock2 because it did most of what I thought we needed. I am
> now running into scenarios where the current set of matchers is
> inadequate, including cases where I have seen patches in the mailing
> lists. I am trying to determine whether to continue using NMock2 or to
> recommend switching to another .Net mock object framework. I am willing
> to contribute patches and time to NMock2 if it is going to continue.
>
> -Richard Holden
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>

[NMock2-Dev] NMock2 status

[Richard H. <Ric...@qu...>]

Is NMock2 dead? We have just started a TDD project here at work and I
recommended NMock2 because it did most of what I thought we needed. I am
now running into scenarios where the current set of matchers is
inadequate, including cases where I have seen patches in the mailing
lists. I am trying to determine whether to continue using NMock2 or to
recommend switching to another .Net mock object framework. I am willing
to contribute patches and time to NMock2 if it is going to continue.

-Richard Holden

Re: [NMock2-Dev] try-catch in class under test causes a false positive

[Joselito D. M. <joe...@gm...>]

Hello,

This is just an FYI.  An earlier version of Rhino Mock (version 2.9.2)
had the same issue.  I reported this to the creator of Rhino Mock and
he had a similar knee-jerk response at first.  However, a few days
after I reported it, he came out with a newer version (version 2.9.5
released November 5) that fixed this issue.

I guess this means I'm better off with Rhino Mocks now.

Joen Moreno

On 11/3/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> The reason for catching "Exception" is not relevant to the issue I
> brought forward.  As I have said, I agree that this is usually bad
> practice to do so.  However, even accepted "best practice" techniques
> have exceptions and I believe that in my case, this is one of those
> exceptions.  Bad practice or not, NMock2 should have been able to tell
> me that there was a failure with the code under test, IMHO.  If the
> NMock2 development team disagrees, I guess I just have to live with
> it.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Joen
>
>
> On 11/3/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote:
> > Why are you catching Exception?  There should be no reason to catch
> > the root exception type.  Application code should catch
> > ApplicationException and/or SystemException, but not Exception.
> >
> > --Nat
> >
> > On 11/4/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> > > I am aware of that as a bad practice.  However, like all other
> > > generalizations, there are exceptions.  My real code is one of those.
> > > I am not talking about the code I sent in my previous email.  It was
> > > just a simple example to show how to reproduce the bug.
> > >
> > > IMHO, this is a bug because this causes a false positive that is
> > > difficult to detect (I was able to detect it by accident). This should
> > > be at least mentioned as a gotcha list or somewhere in the
> > > documentation. Of course, this is just my personal opinion.
> > >
> > > Thank you for responding.
> > >
> > > Joen Moreno
> > >
> > > On 11/3/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote:
> > > > Catching a root exception and ignoring it is a bad practice.  Think of
> > > > this as nMock highlighting design issues that need to be addressed.
> > > >
> > > > --Nat.
> > > >
> > > > On 11/3/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not sure whether to report this as a bug or just a gotcha.
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is the code to reproduce the issue I'm talking about.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the class under test:
> > > > > public class ServiceDependentClass
> > > > >     {
> > > > >         IService service = null;
> > > > >         public ServiceDependentClass(IService service)
> > > > >         {
> > > > >             this.service = service;
> > > > >         }
> > > > >
> > > > >         public int callService()
> > > > >         {
> > > > >             for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++ )
> > > > >             {
> > > > >                 try
> > > > >                 {
> > > > >                     Console.WriteLine("Calling method [" + i + "]");
> > > > >                     int result = service.doSomething("someParameter");
> > > > >                 }
> > > > >                 catch (Exception)
> > > > >                 {
> > > > >                 }
> > > > >             }
> > > > >             return 0;
> > > > >         }
> > > > >     }
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the IService interface:
> > > > > public interface IService
> > > > >     {
> > > > >         int doSomething(string someParameter);
> > > > >     }
> > > > >
> > > > > This is the NUnit test code:
> > > > > [TestFixture]
> > > > >     public class NMock2BugTest
> > > > >     {
> > > > >         [Test]
> > > > >         public void TestBug()
> > > > >         {
> > > > >             Mockery mocks = new Mockery();
> > > > >             IService mockService = mocks.NewMock<IService>();
> > > > >             ServiceDependentClass classUnderTest = new
> > > > > ServiceDependentClass(mockService);
> > > > >
> > > > >             Expect.Once.On(mockService)
> > > > >                 .Method("doSomething")
> > > > >                 .With("someParameter")
> > > > >                 .Will(Return.Value(0));
> > > > >
> > > > >             classUnderTest.callService();
> > > > >             mocks.VerifyAllExpectationsHaveBeenMet();
> > > > >         }
> > > > >     }
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem with this is that I was expecting this test to fail
> > > > > because of the "Expect.Once" call and the class under test actually
> > > > > calls the service.doSomething("someParameter") 3 times.  Instead, the
> > > > > test actually passes when using NUnit because the try-catch(Exception)
> > > > > of the class under test that surrounds the service.doSomething() call
> > > > > consumes the "NMock2.Internal.ExpectationException: unexpected
> > > > > invocation of service.doSomething("someParameter")".
> > > > >
> > > > > Is this truly a bug or is this just something that users need to be aware of?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you,
> > > > >
> > > > > Joen Moreno
> > > > >
> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > > > > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > > > > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > > > > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > > > NMo...@li...
> > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > > > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > > > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > > > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > > NMo...@li...
> > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > NMo...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] try-catch in class under test causes a false positive

[Joselito D. M. <joe...@gm...>]

The reason for catching "Exception" is not relevant to the issue I
brought forward.  As I have said, I agree that this is usually bad
practice to do so.  However, even accepted "best practice" techniques
have exceptions and I believe that in my case, this is one of those
exceptions.  Bad practice or not, NMock2 should have been able to tell
me that there was a failure with the code under test, IMHO.  If the
NMock2 development team disagrees, I guess I just have to live with
it.

Thank you,

Joen


On 11/3/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote:
> Why are you catching Exception?  There should be no reason to catch
> the root exception type.  Application code should catch
> ApplicationException and/or SystemException, but not Exception.
>
> --Nat
>
> On 11/4/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> > I am aware of that as a bad practice.  However, like all other
> > generalizations, there are exceptions.  My real code is one of those.
> > I am not talking about the code I sent in my previous email.  It was
> > just a simple example to show how to reproduce the bug.
> >
> > IMHO, this is a bug because this causes a false positive that is
> > difficult to detect (I was able to detect it by accident). This should
> > be at least mentioned as a gotcha list or somewhere in the
> > documentation. Of course, this is just my personal opinion.
> >
> > Thank you for responding.
> >
> > Joen Moreno
> >
> > On 11/3/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote:
> > > Catching a root exception and ignoring it is a bad practice.  Think of
> > > this as nMock highlighting design issues that need to be addressed.
> > >
> > > --Nat.
> > >
> > > On 11/3/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I am not sure whether to report this as a bug or just a gotcha.
> > > >
> > > > Here is the code to reproduce the issue I'm talking about.
> > > >
> > > > This is the class under test:
> > > > public class ServiceDependentClass
> > > >     {
> > > >         IService service = null;
> > > >         public ServiceDependentClass(IService service)
> > > >         {
> > > >             this.service = service;
> > > >         }
> > > >
> > > >         public int callService()
> > > >         {
> > > >             for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++ )
> > > >             {
> > > >                 try
> > > >                 {
> > > >                     Console.WriteLine("Calling method [" + i + "]");
> > > >                     int result = service.doSomething("someParameter");
> > > >                 }
> > > >                 catch (Exception)
> > > >                 {
> > > >                 }
> > > >             }
> > > >             return 0;
> > > >         }
> > > >     }
> > > >
> > > > This is the IService interface:
> > > > public interface IService
> > > >     {
> > > >         int doSomething(string someParameter);
> > > >     }
> > > >
> > > > This is the NUnit test code:
> > > > [TestFixture]
> > > >     public class NMock2BugTest
> > > >     {
> > > >         [Test]
> > > >         public void TestBug()
> > > >         {
> > > >             Mockery mocks = new Mockery();
> > > >             IService mockService = mocks.NewMock<IService>();
> > > >             ServiceDependentClass classUnderTest = new
> > > > ServiceDependentClass(mockService);
> > > >
> > > >             Expect.Once.On(mockService)
> > > >                 .Method("doSomething")
> > > >                 .With("someParameter")
> > > >                 .Will(Return.Value(0));
> > > >
> > > >             classUnderTest.callService();
> > > >             mocks.VerifyAllExpectationsHaveBeenMet();
> > > >         }
> > > >     }
> > > >
> > > > The problem with this is that I was expecting this test to fail
> > > > because of the "Expect.Once" call and the class under test actually
> > > > calls the service.doSomething("someParameter") 3 times.  Instead, the
> > > > test actually passes when using NUnit because the try-catch(Exception)
> > > > of the class under test that surrounds the service.doSomething() call
> > > > consumes the "NMock2.Internal.ExpectationException: unexpected
> > > > invocation of service.doSomething("someParameter")".
> > > >
> > > > Is this truly a bug or is this just something that users need to be aware of?
> > > >
> > > > Thank you,
> > > >
> > > > Joen Moreno
> > > >
> > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > > > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > > > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > > > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > > NMo...@li...
> > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > NMo...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] try-catch in class under test causes a false positive

[Nat P. <nat...@gm...>]

Why are you catching Exception?  There should be no reason to catch
the root exception type.  Application code should catch
ApplicationException and/or SystemException, but not Exception.

--Nat

On 11/4/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> I am aware of that as a bad practice.  However, like all other
> generalizations, there are exceptions.  My real code is one of those.
> I am not talking about the code I sent in my previous email.  It was
> just a simple example to show how to reproduce the bug.
>
> IMHO, this is a bug because this causes a false positive that is
> difficult to detect (I was able to detect it by accident). This should
> be at least mentioned as a gotcha list or somewhere in the
> documentation. Of course, this is just my personal opinion.
>
> Thank you for responding.
>
> Joen Moreno
>
> On 11/3/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote:
> > Catching a root exception and ignoring it is a bad practice.  Think of
> > this as nMock highlighting design issues that need to be addressed.
> >
> > --Nat.
> >
> > On 11/3/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I am not sure whether to report this as a bug or just a gotcha.
> > >
> > > Here is the code to reproduce the issue I'm talking about.
> > >
> > > This is the class under test:
> > > public class ServiceDependentClass
> > >     {
> > >         IService service = null;
> > >         public ServiceDependentClass(IService service)
> > >         {
> > >             this.service = service;
> > >         }
> > >
> > >         public int callService()
> > >         {
> > >             for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++ )
> > >             {
> > >                 try
> > >                 {
> > >                     Console.WriteLine("Calling method [" + i + "]");
> > >                     int result = service.doSomething("someParameter");
> > >                 }
> > >                 catch (Exception)
> > >                 {
> > >                 }
> > >             }
> > >             return 0;
> > >         }
> > >     }
> > >
> > > This is the IService interface:
> > > public interface IService
> > >     {
> > >         int doSomething(string someParameter);
> > >     }
> > >
> > > This is the NUnit test code:
> > > [TestFixture]
> > >     public class NMock2BugTest
> > >     {
> > >         [Test]
> > >         public void TestBug()
> > >         {
> > >             Mockery mocks = new Mockery();
> > >             IService mockService = mocks.NewMock<IService>();
> > >             ServiceDependentClass classUnderTest = new
> > > ServiceDependentClass(mockService);
> > >
> > >             Expect.Once.On(mockService)
> > >                 .Method("doSomething")
> > >                 .With("someParameter")
> > >                 .Will(Return.Value(0));
> > >
> > >             classUnderTest.callService();
> > >             mocks.VerifyAllExpectationsHaveBeenMet();
> > >         }
> > >     }
> > >
> > > The problem with this is that I was expecting this test to fail
> > > because of the "Expect.Once" call and the class under test actually
> > > calls the service.doSomething("someParameter") 3 times.  Instead, the
> > > test actually passes when using NUnit because the try-catch(Exception)
> > > of the class under test that surrounds the service.doSomething() call
> > > consumes the "NMock2.Internal.ExpectationException: unexpected
> > > invocation of service.doSomething("someParameter")".
> > >
> > > Is this truly a bug or is this just something that users need to be aware of?
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > >
> > > Joen Moreno
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > > NMo...@li...
> > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> > >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] try-catch in class under test causes a false positive

[Joselito D. M. <joe...@gm...>]

I am aware of that as a bad practice.  However, like all other
generalizations, there are exceptions.  My real code is one of those.
I am not talking about the code I sent in my previous email.  It was
just a simple example to show how to reproduce the bug.

IMHO, this is a bug because this causes a false positive that is
difficult to detect (I was able to detect it by accident). This should
be at least mentioned as a gotcha list or somewhere in the
documentation. Of course, this is just my personal opinion.

Thank you for responding.

Joen Moreno

On 11/3/06, Nat Pryce <nat...@gm...> wrote:
> Catching a root exception and ignoring it is a bad practice.  Think of
> this as nMock highlighting design issues that need to be addressed.
>
> --Nat.
>
> On 11/3/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I am not sure whether to report this as a bug or just a gotcha.
> >
> > Here is the code to reproduce the issue I'm talking about.
> >
> > This is the class under test:
> > public class ServiceDependentClass
> >     {
> >         IService service = null;
> >         public ServiceDependentClass(IService service)
> >         {
> >             this.service = service;
> >         }
> >
> >         public int callService()
> >         {
> >             for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++ )
> >             {
> >                 try
> >                 {
> >                     Console.WriteLine("Calling method [" + i + "]");
> >                     int result = service.doSomething("someParameter");
> >                 }
> >                 catch (Exception)
> >                 {
> >                 }
> >             }
> >             return 0;
> >         }
> >     }
> >
> > This is the IService interface:
> > public interface IService
> >     {
> >         int doSomething(string someParameter);
> >     }
> >
> > This is the NUnit test code:
> > [TestFixture]
> >     public class NMock2BugTest
> >     {
> >         [Test]
> >         public void TestBug()
> >         {
> >             Mockery mocks = new Mockery();
> >             IService mockService = mocks.NewMock<IService>();
> >             ServiceDependentClass classUnderTest = new
> > ServiceDependentClass(mockService);
> >
> >             Expect.Once.On(mockService)
> >                 .Method("doSomething")
> >                 .With("someParameter")
> >                 .Will(Return.Value(0));
> >
> >             classUnderTest.callService();
> >             mocks.VerifyAllExpectationsHaveBeenMet();
> >         }
> >     }
> >
> > The problem with this is that I was expecting this test to fail
> > because of the "Expect.Once" call and the class under test actually
> > calls the service.doSomething("someParameter") 3 times.  Instead, the
> > test actually passes when using NUnit because the try-catch(Exception)
> > of the class under test that surrounds the service.doSomething() call
> > consumes the "NMock2.Internal.ExpectationException: unexpected
> > invocation of service.doSomething("someParameter")".
> >
> > Is this truly a bug or is this just something that users need to be aware of?
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Joen Moreno
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> > _______________________________________________
> > NMock-two-dev mailing list
> > NMo...@li...
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
> >
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>

Re: [NMock2-Dev] try-catch in class under test causes a false positive

[Nat P. <nat...@gm...>]

Catching a root exception and ignoring it is a bad practice.  Think of
this as nMock highlighting design issues that need to be addressed.

--Nat.

On 11/3/06, Joselito D. Moreno <joe...@gm...> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am not sure whether to report this as a bug or just a gotcha.
>
> Here is the code to reproduce the issue I'm talking about.
>
> This is the class under test:
> public class ServiceDependentClass
>     {
>         IService service = null;
>         public ServiceDependentClass(IService service)
>         {
>             this.service = service;
>         }
>
>         public int callService()
>         {
>             for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++ )
>             {
>                 try
>                 {
>                     Console.WriteLine("Calling method [" + i + "]");
>                     int result = service.doSomething("someParameter");
>                 }
>                 catch (Exception)
>                 {
>                 }
>             }
>             return 0;
>         }
>     }
>
> This is the IService interface:
> public interface IService
>     {
>         int doSomething(string someParameter);
>     }
>
> This is the NUnit test code:
> [TestFixture]
>     public class NMock2BugTest
>     {
>         [Test]
>         public void TestBug()
>         {
>             Mockery mocks = new Mockery();
>             IService mockService = mocks.NewMock<IService>();
>             ServiceDependentClass classUnderTest = new
> ServiceDependentClass(mockService);
>
>             Expect.Once.On(mockService)
>                 .Method("doSomething")
>                 .With("someParameter")
>                 .Will(Return.Value(0));
>
>             classUnderTest.callService();
>             mocks.VerifyAllExpectationsHaveBeenMet();
>         }
>     }
>
> The problem with this is that I was expecting this test to fail
> because of the "Expect.Once" call and the class under test actually
> calls the service.doSomething("someParameter") 3 times.  Instead, the
> test actually passes when using NUnit because the try-catch(Exception)
> of the class under test that surrounds the service.doSomething() call
> consumes the "NMock2.Internal.ExpectationException: unexpected
> invocation of service.doSomething("someParameter")".
>
> Is this truly a bug or is this just something that users need to be aware of?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Joen Moreno
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> NMock-two-dev mailing list
> NMo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nmock-two-dev
>

[NMock2-Dev] try-catch in class under test causes a false positive

[Joselito D. M. <joe...@gm...>]

Hello,

I am not sure whether to report this as a bug or just a gotcha.

Here is the code to reproduce the issue I'm talking about.

This is the class under test:
public class ServiceDependentClass
    {
        IService service = null;
        public ServiceDependentClass(IService service)
        {
            this.service = service;
        }

        public int callService()
        {
            for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++ )
            {
                try
                {
                    Console.WriteLine("Calling method [" + i + "]");
                    int result = service.doSomething("someParameter");
                }
                catch (Exception)
                {
                }
            }
            return 0;
        }
    }

This is the IService interface:
public interface IService
    {
        int doSomething(string someParameter);
    }

This is the NUnit test code:
[TestFixture]
    public class NMock2BugTest
    {
        [Test]
        public void TestBug()
        {
            Mockery mocks = new Mockery();
            IService mockService = mocks.NewMock<IService>();
            ServiceDependentClass classUnderTest = new
ServiceDependentClass(mockService);

            Expect.Once.On(mockService)
                .Method("doSomething")
                .With("someParameter")
                .Will(Return.Value(0));

            classUnderTest.callService();
            mocks.VerifyAllExpectationsHaveBeenMet();
        }
    }

The problem with this is that I was expecting this test to fail
because of the "Expect.Once" call and the class under test actually
calls the service.doSomething("someParameter") 3 times.  Instead, the
test actually passes when using NUnit because the try-catch(Exception)
of the class under test that surrounds the service.doSomething() call
consumes the "NMock2.Internal.ExpectationException: unexpected
invocation of service.doSomething("someParameter")".

Is this truly a bug or is this just something that users need to be aware of?

Thank you,

Joen Moreno

Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?

[David Webster-J. <da...@pi...>]

Sorry I've not been back to you.
 
There only appear to be two forms of the attribute according to MSDN.
One with a public key (both assemblies must be signed) and one without
the key (when neither is signed).
 
Neither can be coerced into solving the problem.
 
Thanks
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of Steve
Mitcham
Sent: 18 August 2006 15:31
To: NMock2 Development Discussion
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?
 
You need to add the fully qualified signed assembly name with the
version and public key token to make it work.  Don't know what that is
off the top of my head.
 
  _____  

From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of David
Webster-Jaggard
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 8:41 AM
To: 'NMock2 Development Discussion'
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?
 
Wow you're up early! :-)
 
I added this line to the test project to make NMock2 a friend
 
[assembly: InternalsVisibleTo("NMock2")]
 
It didn't help although it seems like it should. Any idea why not?
 
Thanks
 
-----Original Message-----
From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of Steve
Mitcham
Sent: 18 August 2006 14:23
To: NMock2 Development Discussion
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?
 
Making Nmock2 a friend assembly would work.  You could also have a
conditional compilation flag that made them public when built for
testing purposes.  However, I think the value of testing internal
interfaces directly is limited.
  _____  

From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of David
Webster-Jaggard
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 8:09 AM
To: nmo...@li...
Subject: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?
 
I'm upgrading our unit tests to NMock2 and have come across a bit of a
problem. If I try to mock and internal interface I get an access denied
error when I run the test. Here is some example code:
 
using NMock2;
using NUnit.Framework;
 
namespace NMock2Test
{
  internal interface IInternalInterface
  {
    void DoNothing();
  }
  
  [TestFixture]
  public class Class1
  {
    [Test]
    public void Test()
    {
      Mockery mocks = new Mockery();
      IInternalInterface mockInterface =
mocks.NewMock<IInternalInterface>();
    }
  }
}
 
Is there anyway to get around this (maybe make NMock2 a friend assembly,
however you do that..)? I don't want to start making internal interfaces
public.
 
Thanks
 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by  <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is

believed to be clean. 
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by  <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is

believed to be clean. 
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by  <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is

believed to be clean. 
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by  <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is

believed to be clean. 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?

[Steve M. <Ste...@ty...>]

You need to add the fully qualified signed assembly name with the
version and public key token to make it work.  Don't know what that is
off the top of my head.

=20

________________________________

From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of David
Webster-Jaggard
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 8:41 AM
To: 'NMock2 Development Discussion'
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?

=20

Wow you're up early! :-)

=20

I added this line to the test project to make NMock2 a friend

=20

[assembly: InternalsVisibleTo("NMock2")]

=20

It didn't help although it seems like it should. Any idea why not?

=20

Thanks

=20

-----Original Message-----
From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of Steve
Mitcham
Sent: 18 August 2006 14:23
To: NMock2 Development Discussion
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?

=20

Making Nmock2 a friend assembly would work.  You could also have a
conditional compilation flag that made them public when built for
testing purposes.  However, I think the value of testing internal
interfaces directly is limited.

________________________________

From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of David
Webster-Jaggard
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 8:09 AM
To: nmo...@li...
Subject: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?

=20

I'm upgrading our unit tests to NMock2 and have come across a bit of a
problem. If I try to mock and internal interface I get an access denied
error when I run the test. Here is some example code:

=20

using NMock2;

using NUnit.Framework;

=20

namespace NMock2Test

{

  internal interface IInternalInterface

  {

    void DoNothing();

  }

 =20

  [TestFixture]

  public class Class1

  {

    [Test]

    public void Test()

    {

      Mockery mocks =3D new Mockery();

      IInternalInterface mockInterface =3D
mocks.NewMock<IInternalInterface>();

    }

  }

}

=20

Is there anyway to get around this (maybe make NMock2 a friend assembly,
however you do that..)? I don't want to start making internal interfaces
public.

=20

Thanks

=20


--=20
This message has been scanned for viruses and=20
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean.=20
--=20
This message has been scanned for viruses and=20
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean.=20
--=20
This message has been scanned for viruses and=20
dangerous content by MailScanner <http://www.mailscanner.info/> , and is

believed to be clean.=20

Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?

[David Webster-J. <da...@pi...>]

Wow you're up early! :-)
 
I added this line to the test project to make NMock2 a friend
 
[assembly: InternalsVisibleTo("NMock2")]
 
It didn't help although it seems like it should. Any idea why not?
 
Thanks
 
-----Original Message-----
From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of Steve
Mitcham
Sent: 18 August 2006 14:23
To: NMock2 Development Discussion
Subject: Re: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?
 
Making Nmock2 a friend assembly would work.  You could also have a
conditional compilation flag that made them public when built for
testing purposes.  However, I think the value of testing internal
interfaces directly is limited.
  _____  

From: nmo...@li...
[mailto:nmo...@li...] On Behalf Of David
Webster-Jaggard
Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 8:09 AM
To: nmo...@li...
Subject: [NMock2-Dev] Access is denied on internal interfaces?
 
I'm upgrading our unit tests to NMock2 and have come across a bit of a
problem. If I try to mock and internal interface I get an access denied
error when I run the test. Here is some example code:
 
using NMock2;
using NUnit.Framework;
 
namespace NMock2Test
{
  internal interface IInternalInterface
  {
    void DoNothing();
  }
  
  [TestFixture]
  public class Class1
  {
    [Test]
    public void Test()
    {
      Mockery mocks = new Mockery();
      IInternalInterface mockInterface =
mocks.NewMock<IInternalInterface>();
    }
  }
}
 
Is there anyway to get around this (maybe make NMock2 a friend assembly,
however you do that..)? I don't want to start making internal interfaces
public.
 
Thanks
 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by  <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is

believed to be clean. 
-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and 
dangerous content by  <http://www.mailscanner.info/> MailScanner, and is

believed to be clean. 

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.