Great, thanks guys!
On Jun 18, 11:56 am, Tim Barcz <[email protected]> wrote:
> I agree with Chris...typically I prefer to mock interfaces over class since
> you don't have to worry about implementation details...
>
> if possible...create an interface.
>
> Tim
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Chris Missal <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > That's what I'd do, but I'm not master. :)
>
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:43 PM, [email protected] <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> By "extracting an interface from the third party class directly" do
> >> you mean creating a wrapper class which implements an interface which
> >> defines the methods I'm interested in?
>
> >> On Jun 18, 11:34 am, Chris Missal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > I think it would be easier to mock if you extracted an interface from
> >> the
> >> > third party class directly, rather than another class. This way, you
> >> don't
> >> > have to worry about the constructor.
>
> >> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:29 PM, [email protected] <
> >> [email protected]
>
> >> > > wrote:
>
> >> > > Yep, I'm not mocking the SUT (although I do admit that I got confused
> >> > > about this at first too).
>
> >> > > Basically, I am wrapping a 3rd party class in my own class so that I
> >> > > can mock it (since that 3rd party class doesn't implement an interface
> >> > > which defines the methods I am interested in, neither are the methods
> >> > > I'm interested in defined as virtual). I'm trying to do it by
> >> > > implementing the wrapper class as a class with virtual methods (rather
> >> > > then a normal class without overridable methods but which implements
> >> > > an interface which defines those methods) - it didn't make sense to me
> >> > > to have the interface simply for the sake of having it...
>
> >> > > On Jun 18, 11:22 am, Chris Missal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > > Since it's a mock, the dependencies shouldn't matter since you'll be
> >> > > > artificially handling the functionality of the mocked object.
>
> >> > > > Be sure that the object you're mocking isn't the class under test,
> >> > > usually
> >> > > > you'll mock the dependencies or the classes that the class under
> >> test (or
> >> > > > system under test (SUT)) interacts with, are mocked.
>
> >> > > > Make sense? This was a bit confusing for me at first.
>
> >> > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:14 PM, [email protected] <
> >> > > [email protected]
>
> >> > > > > wrote:
>
> >> > > > > Sure does.
>
> >> > > > > In fact, it doesn't stop me from doing
>
> >> > > > > SomeClass c = MockRepository.CreateMock<SomeClass>(null, null);
>
> >> > > > > either (the dependencies of SomeClass shouldn't matter in this
> >> case
> >> > > > > since it is just a mock).
>
> >> > > > > So this problem is not stopping me from using RhinoMocks to mock
> >> the
> >> > > > > class, it's just that this behaviour appears to contradict the
> >> wiki
> >> > > > > and as this is my first time mocking a class (I have always mocked
> >> > > > > interfaces before), I was worried that I was doing something
> >> wrong...
>
> >> > > > > On Jun 18, 11:11 am, Chris Missal <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > > > > > Does it work when you try:
>
> >> > > > > > SomeClass c = MockRepository.CreateMock<SomeClass>(a, b);
>
> >> > > > > > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 9:39 PM, [email protected]
> >> > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> >> > > > > > > Hi,
>
> >> > > > > > > I'm trying to mock a class that doesn't have a default
> >> constructor
> >> > > > > > > (i.e. it has been 'overidden' by a custom constructor which is
> >> > > > > > > parameterized) which - according to the wiki (
> >> > >http://ayende.com/wiki/
> >> > > > > > > Rhino%20Mocks%20Mocking%20classes.ashx) - should be possible.
> >> There
> >> > > > > > > isn't anything particularly special about what I'm trying to
> >> do,
> >> > > > > > > simply something like the following:
>
> >> > > > > > > public class SomeClass
> >> > > > > > > {
> >> > > > > > > public SomeClass(A a, B b)
> >> > > > > > > { ... }
>
> >> > > > > > > virtual public string SomeMethod()
> >> > > > > > > { ... }
> >> > > > > > > }
>
> >> > > > > > > [Test]
> >> > > > > > > public void SomeTest()
> >> > > > > > > {
> >> > > > > > > SomeClass c = MockRepository.CreateMock<SomeClass>();
> >> > > > > > > ...
> >> > > > > > > }
>
> >> > > > > > > NUnit reports the following error:
>
> >> > > > > > > System.MissingMethodException : Can't find a constructor with
> >> > > matching
> >> > > > > > > arguments
> >> > > > > > > ----> System.MissingMethodException : Constructor on type
> >> > > > > > > 'SomeClass207ade2ffbbc4e7cba459d96ac172bb9' not found.
>
> >> > > > > > > cheers!
>
> >> > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > Chris Missalhttp://chrismissal.lostechies.com/
>
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > Chris Missalhttp://chrismissal.lostechies.com/
>
> >> > --
> >> > Chris Missalhttp://chrismissal.lostechies.com/
>
> > --
> > Chris Missal
>
> >http://chrismissal.lostechies.com/
>
> --
> Tim Barcz
> ASPInsiderhttp://timbarcz.devlicio.ushttp://www.twitter.com/timbarcz
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Rhino.Mocks" 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/RhinoMocks?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
