It makes you dig the code, this is the reason.
And digging into a big codebase, even though painful, is a good challenge
itself.
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Simone Busoli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> I'm wondering why he's struggling with the challenge you proposed if he
> doesn't even know RhinoMocks.
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 8:30 AM, Ayende Rahien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The main issue that you have is understanding the current behavior, I
>> think.Right now, for any method call done in the record stage, Rhino
>> Mocks will return null. Expectations and setup return values are ignored
>> until we get to the replay phase.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 5:14 AM, webpaul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I think I've gotten somewhere.. The first one passes which makes
>>> me think I can get the second one passing. The syntax is slightly
>>> different than your initial request but I haven't looked into the
>>> reason for that just yet.
>>>
>>> [Test]
>>> public void CanCallPropertyAlternateSyntax()
>>> {
>>> var mockIdentity =
>>> MockRepository.GenerateFluentMock<ISomeInterface>();
>>>
>>> mockIdentity.Expect(x => x.Name).Return("foo");
>>>
>>> Assert.AreEqual("foo", mockIdentity.Name);
>>> }
>>>
>>> [Test]
>>> public void CanCallSomeRandomInterfaceProperty()
>>> {
>>> var mockService =
>>> MockRepository.GenerateFluentMock<IMyService>();
>>>
>>> mockService.Expect( x => x.Identity.Name).Return("foo");
>>>
>>> Assert.AreEqual("foo", mockService.Identity.Name);
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Oct 9, 9:50 pm, webpaul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > So here's another pair of tests, first not working (but I thought it
>>> > would) and second not. So I'm guessing this is more than I originally
>>> > thought it involved? Sorry for all the noobitude, I just don't have a
>>> > strong grasp of exactly what is expected to already work since I don't
>>> > use Rhino Mocks in any way except the expect-verify syntax.
>>> >
>>> > [Test]
>>> > public void CanCallProperty()
>>> > {
>>> > var mockIdentity =
>>> > MockRepository.GenerateMock<ISomeInterface>();
>>> >
>>> > Expect.Call(mockIdentity.Name).Return("foo");
>>> > Assert.AreEqual("foo", mockIdentity.Name);
>>> > }
>>> >
>>> > [Test]
>>> > public void NormalInterfaceCall()
>>> > {
>>> > MockRepository mocks = new MockRepository();
>>> > var mockIdentity = mocks.DynamicMock<ISomeInterface>();
>>> >
>>> > With.Mocks(mocks).Expecting(delegate
>>> > {
>>> > Expect.Call(mockIdentity.Name).Return("foo");
>>> > }).Verify(delegate
>>> > {
>>> > Assert.AreEqual("foo", mockIdentity.Name);
>>> > });
>>> > }
>>> >
>>> > On Oct 9, 8:49 pm, webpaul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > Is it by design that the first test does not work (saying I need to
>>> > > use property behavior, which is the second test which works)
>>> >
>>> > > Given this it seems it might be the same issue I am seeing in trying
>>> > > to get this to work, proabbly a misunderstanding on how this is
>>> > > supposed to work.
>>> >
>>> > > [Test]
>>> > > public void NestedInterfaceCallWithExpect()
>>> > > {
>>> > > MockRepository mocks = new MockRepository();
>>> > > var mockService = mocks.Stub<IMyService>();
>>> > > var mockIdentity = mocks.Stub<ISomeInterface>();
>>> >
>>> > > With.Mocks(mocks).Expecting(delegate
>>> > > {
>>> >
>>> > > Expect.Call(mockService.Identity).Return(mockIdentity);
>>> > > Expect.Call(mockService.Identity.Name
>>> ).Return("foo");
>>> > > }).Verify(delegate
>>> > > {
>>> > > Assert.AreEqual("foo", mockService.Identity.Name);
>>> > > });
>>> > > }
>>> >
>>> > > [Test]
>>> > > public void NestedInterfaceCall()
>>> > > {
>>> > > MockRepository mocks = new MockRepository();
>>> > > var mockService = mocks.Stub<IMyService>();
>>> > > var mockIdentity = mocks.Stub<ISomeInterface>();
>>> >
>>> > > With.Mocks(mocks).Expecting(delegate
>>> > > {
>>> > > mockService.Identity = mockIdentity;
>>> > > mockService.Identity.Name = "foo";
>>> > > }).Verify(delegate
>>> > > {
>>> > > Assert.AreEqual("foo", mockService.Identity.Name);
>>> > > });
>>> > > }
>>> >
>>> > > On Oct 9, 7:33 pm, webpaul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > Ok, not a big deal. Any tips you can give about the code I posted
>>> and
>>> > > > where I might be going wrong?
>>> >
>>> > > > On Oct 9, 1:57 am, "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > Yes, I do.You need to build from nant the first time you get the
>>> code from
>>> > > > > the repository. See how to build.txt for details
>>> >
>>> > > > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 6:01 AM, webpaul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > Here is what I have so far, which gives me "This action is
>>> invalid
>>> > > > > > when the mock object is in replay state" which seems to make
>>> sense
>>> > > > > > since I am trying to setup expectation while in the replay
>>> state.
>>> > > > > > Advice?
>>> >
>>> > > > > > MockRepository.cs
>>> >
>>> > > > > > internal object MethodCall(IInvocation invocation,
>>> object
>>> > > > > > proxy, MethodInfo method, object[] args)
>>> > > > > > {
>>> > > > > > ....
>>> > > > > > return MethodCallWithDefault(state, invocation,
>>> proxy,
>>> > > > > > method, args);
>>> > > > > > }
>>> >
>>> > > > > > private object MethodCallWithDefault(IMockState state,
>>> > > > > > IInvocation invocation, object proxy, MethodInfo method,
>>> object[]
>>> > > > > > args)
>>> > > > > > {
>>> > > > > > object returnObject = state.MethodCall(invocation,
>>> method,
>>> > > > > > args);
>>> >
>>> > > > > > //if returned object is null and it is a property
>>> for an
>>> > > > > > interface, auto mock it
>>> > > > > > if (
>>> > > > > > returnObject == null &&
>>> > > > > > AllowNewObjectForNullInterfaces &&
>>> > > > > > method.ReturnType != null &&
>>> > > > > > method.ReturnType.IsInterface &&
>>> > > > > > method.IsSpecialName &&
>>> > > > > > method.Name.StartsWith("get_")
>>> > > > > > )
>>> > > > > > {
>>> > > > > > //create new stub for return object
>>> > > > > > returnObject = this.Stub(method.ReturnType);
>>> >
>>> > > > > > //setup up mock result for new instance
>>> > > > > > state.LastMethodOptions.Return(returnObject);
>>> > > > > > }
>>> >
>>> > > > > > return returnObject;
>>> > > > > > }
>>> >
>>> > > > > > On Oct 8, 8:39 pm, webpaul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> > > > > > > Just so we are clear, you expect
>>> > > > > > > Expect.Call(
>>> mockService.Identity.Interface1.Interface2.Interface3.Name
>>> > > > > > ).Return("foo")
>>> > > > > > > to work as well, right?
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > Also, every time I get source from the rhino trunk I have to
>>> go in and
>>> > > > > > > add the missing assemblyinfo.cs files to all the projects to
>>> get it to
>>> > > > > > > compile. Any good reason for that?
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > On Oct 8, 1:54 am, "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > No, you don't need to touch dynamic proxy.The behavior can
>>> be
>>> > > > > > controlled
>>> > > > > > > > from RecordMockState. Take a look at RhinoIntercepor, as an
>>> example of
>>> > > > > > how
>>> > > > > > > > we manage things.
>>> > > > > > > > This is basically making rhino mocks return a mock for an
>>> interface
>>> > > > > > method
>>> > > > > > > > cal.
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 6:32 AM, webpaul <
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > Regarding
>>> >
>>> > > > > >
>>> http://ayende.com/Blog/archive/2008/10/08/rhino-mocks-challenge-imple...
>>> > > > > > > > > :
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > Do you expect that Identity is not null in this test and
>>> should have
>>> > > > > > > > > an implementation? If so, I'm curious whether you expect
>>> changes to
>>> > > > > > > > > Castle.DynamicProxy.ProxyGenerator or not. In the below
>>> test
>>> > > > > > > > > mockService.Identity is null and gives an exception as
>>> such. Do you
>>> > > > > > > > > expect that and want that fixed or am I missing
>>> something?
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > public interface ISomeInterface
>>> > > > > > > > > {
>>> > > > > > > > > string Name { get; set; }
>>> > > > > > > > > }
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > public interface IMyService
>>> > > > > > > > > {
>>> > > > > > > > > ISomeInterface Identity { get; set;}
>>> > > > > > > > > }
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > > [TestFixture]
>>> > > > > > > > > public class FluentMocksTests
>>> > > > > > > > > {
>>> > > > > > > > > [Test]
>>> > > > > > > > > public void
>>> CanCallSomeRandomInterfaceProperty()
>>> > > > > > > > > {
>>> > > > > > > > > var mockService =
>>> > > > > > > > > MockRepository.GenerateMock<IMyService>();
>>> > > > > > > > > Expect.Call(mockService.Identity.Name
>>> ).Return("foo");
>>> > > > > > > > > Assert.AreEqual("foo",
>>> mockService.Identity.Name);
>>> > > > > > > > > }
>>> > > > > > > > > }- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>> >
>>> > - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>
--
Tuna Toksöz
Typos included to enhance the readers attention!
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Rhino Tools Dev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rhino-tools-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
