Hi Ivan, I was thinking Mono.Cecil first and then the CLR profiling API as I'm pretty sure that will work. I used a similar approach for http://blog.benhall.me.uk/2008/11/net-fault-injection-very-early-proof-of.html but the fault injection was done via some Microsoft Research stuff. Either approach your re-writing IL, it just depends which layer you work with.
Lots of interesting problems to solve. Then it would just need a nice Ruby wrapper so it's transparent to the end user - ideally incorporating the backend work into Caricature. Ben On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 8:34 PM, Ivan Porto Carrero <i...@flanders.co.nz> wrote: > You don't need to do anything as drastic as disassemble dlls though :). > There are several solutions and I think the cleanest one is to use the CLR > profiling API. Another avenue I could take is to use Mono.Cecil but I don't > like the idea of the IL rewriting stuff. heck even postsharp would probably > do the trick. > I need to look into the CLR profiling API to make the rest of the stuff > happening as that is the cleanest solution IMO. The limitation only exists > if you're mocking CLR classes for use in other CLR classes. If you're going > to use it in ruby code you can do whatever you want. > My mocker does most of what Moq and Rhino.Mocks do, except that it doesn't > use LCG or expression trees but just the reflection API once per type. from > there on out it uses ruby to do its job. > What I need to add but don't know if they are really necessary are call > count constraints. > And I also want to make the RSpec integration a little bit better so that > you can enlist an expectation for verification too. > The docs are a bit outdated too, best is to look into spec/bacon/integration > that's where I test out the new features or syntax additions. > I have a chapter in my book that explains the use of Caricature with RSpec > which will be in the update at the end of january. Contact me off list if > you want a discount :) > --- > Met vriendelijke groeten - Best regards - Salutations > Ivan Porto Carrero > Blog: http://flanders.co.nz > Twitter: http://twitter.com/casualjim > Author of IronRuby in Action (http://manning.com/carrero) > > > > On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 8:16 PM, andrew Wilson <a.wilso...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Ivan, >> >> Seems like a what I was looking for, however according to the >> documentation it says it can only mock virtuals and non-static though. >> >> I don't want that restriction :( One of the advantages I was hoping to >> leverage was the ability to re-write methods that I wouldn't otherwise be >> able to. >> >> -A >> >> -- >> When I wrote this, only God and I understood what I was doing. Now, God >> only knows - Karl Weierstrass >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ironruby-core mailing list >> Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > > _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
