works for me as the basis for what we do, yes :-)
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Tim Barcz <[email protected]> wrote:
> I suggested this before (possibly in a different thread)
>
> but I would like to see the type inferred from usage.
>
> // Arrange
> var fake = Fake.Create<IFoo>();
> fake.Stub(x=>x.Method()).Return("hello world");
>
> // Act
> fake.Method()
>
>
>
> // Arrange
> var fake = Fake.Create<IFoo>();
> fake.Stub(x=>x.Method()).Return("hello world");
>
> // Act
> fake.Method()
>
> // Assert
> fake.AssertWasCalled(x=>x.Bar())
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Ayende Rahien <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Ideally, I would like to get some ideas about the desired syntax and
>> capabilities.That will allow us to have better idea about what is needed.
>> I intend to make use of a lot of the RM existing infrastructure, so it is
>> the surface behavior that interests me the most.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 5:23 PM, Tim Barcz <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I too am curious on the organizing around this...
>>>
>>> Do we need/want to set up something like tickets or use AgileZen (or
>>> other tools) for project purposes?
>>>
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 3:17 AM, Alex McMahon <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ayende,
>>>>
>>>> When you say "you are welcome to contribute" will you be organising
>>>> this in some way? will there be a list of tasks?
>>>>
>>>> I've not submitted a patch to Rhino Mocks before, but I'd be
>>>> interested in having a go at submitting one for 4.0.
>>>>
>>>> Do you think there will be tasks that could be tackled by someone
>>>> who's not already overly familiar with the code base?
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> Alex McMahon
>>>>
>>>> 2009/9/1 Ayende Rahien <[email protected]>:
>>>> > This is a blog post that would show up day after tomorrow, I am
>>>> posting it
>>>> > here to get some traction in the mailing list before we make it really
>>>> > public.
>>>> >
>>>> > Well, now that Rhino Mocks 3.6 is out of the way, we need to think
>>>> about
>>>> > what the next version will look like.
>>>> >
>>>> > Initially, I thought to match Rhino Mocks 4.0 to the .NET 4.0 release
>>>> and
>>>> > support mocking dynamic variables, but while this is still on the
>>>> planning
>>>> > board, I think that it is much more important to stop and take a look
>>>> at
>>>> > where Rhino Mocks is now and where we would like it to be.
>>>> >
>>>> > I started Rhino Mocks about 5 years ago, and the codebase has stood
>>>> well in
>>>> > the test of time. There aren’t any nasty places and we can keep
>>>> releasing
>>>> > new features with no major issues.
>>>> >
>>>> > However, 5 years ago the community perception of mocking was different
>>>> than
>>>> > what it is now. Rhino Mocks hasn’t really changed significantly since
>>>> it 1.1
>>>> > days, for that matter, you can take a code base using Rhino Mocks for
>>>> .Net
>>>> > 1.1 and move it to Rhino Mocks 3.6 with no issues.
>>>> >
>>>> > But one of the most frequent complaints that I have heard is that
>>>> Rhino
>>>> > Mocks API has became too complex over the years, there are too many
>>>> options
>>>> > and knobs that you can turn. I know that my own style of interaction
>>>> testing
>>>> > has changed as well.
>>>> >
>>>> > The current plan for Rhino Mocks 4.0 is that we will break backward
>>>> > compatibility in a big way. That means that we are going to
>>>> drastically
>>>> > simplify everything in the framework.
>>>> >
>>>> > We are still discussing this in the mailing list, but currently it
>>>> looks
>>>> > like we will go with the following route:
>>>> >
>>>> > Kill the dynamic, strict, partial and stub terminology. No one cares.
>>>> It is
>>>> > a fake.
>>>> > Remove the record / playback API. The AAA method is much simpler.
>>>> > Simplify mocking options, aiming at moving as much as possible from
>>>> > expectation style to assert style.
>>>> > Keep as much of the current capabilities as we can. That means that if
>>>> Rhino
>>>> > Mocks was able to support a scenario, it should still support it for
>>>> the 4.0
>>>> > version, hopefully in a simpler fashion.
>>>> >
>>>> > The end result is putting Rhino Mocks on an API diet. I am looking for
>>>> help
>>>> > in doing this, both in terms of suggested syntax and in terms of
>>>> actual
>>>> > patches.
>>>> >
>>>> > You are welcome to contribute…
>>>> >
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tim Barcz
>>> Microsoft ASPInsider
>>> http://timbarcz.devlicio.us
>>> http://www.twitter.com/timbarcz
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Tim Barcz
> Microsoft ASPInsider
> http://timbarcz.devlicio.us
> http://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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
