Skip to main content

Misindirection

The first time I popped open the solution after I did my ‘SharpMock’ spike, I was met with a surprise – the one test was failing! Surely I didn’t commit a cardinal sin and write a post about something that didn’t even work. It turns out I had been messing around with the OnMethodInvocationAspectOptions returned by overriding the GetOptions method of OnMethodInvocationAspect. Here’s the code that was in MockableAttribute:

public override OnMethodInvocationAspectOptions GetOptions()
{
    return OnMethodInvocationAspectOptions.WeaveSiteCall;
}


The original incarnation of Expect.Call(….) took a string to specify which method on which class to call, so the test passed with the above code. Now we have this syntax:



Expect.Call(() => PersonDao.GetPerson(0), ryan);


And the test doesn't pass. This means that if we want to have syntax like this (and we do!), we have to do the weaving in the class we’re calling. Much more importantly, if we want to preserve this syntax and not modify the called class (and in the future we will!), we’ll have to intercept calls made in the test as well.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Who I'm Is

I am a junior .NET developer currently working in Chicago, IL. I am starting this blog in order to enhance my knowledge of programming subject matter. Hopefully, someone else will be helped along the way. This first post will probably be edited soon...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stubbing Static Methods with PostSharp

TypeMock uses the Profiler API to allow mocking, stubbing, etc. of classes used by code under test. It has the ability to handle sealed classes, static classes, non-virtual methods, and other troublesome-yet-oft-encountered scenarios in the world of unit testing. Other frameworks rely on proxies to intercept method calls, limiting them to be able to only fake virtual, abstract, and interface members. They also rely on dependecy injection to place the proxies as the concrete implementation of calls to the abstracted interface members. Anyone working with a legacy codebase is bound to run into static method calls (especially in the data access layer), dependencies on concrete types with non-virtual methods, and sealed class dependencies (HttpContext anyone?). The only way to unit test this without refactoring is with TypeMock. I've never used TypeMock, and I'm sure it's a great product, but it's not free. I decided to spike some code to see if I could solve the prob...
6 comments
Read more

Strongly-Typed Property Constraints in Rhino Mocks

UPDATE: As I suspected, this functionality was right in front of my face – it’s called PredicateConstraint in Rhino Mocks. I also realize that I managed to completely ignore the existence of Predicate<T> in the framework, and write my own predicate delegate. Hey, I was on a roll. Rhino Mocks has a PropertyConstraint class that allows you to check the values on properties of objects passed into the method as part of the verification for that method being called. Unfortunately, the name of the property is specified as a string, which means the benefits of strong-typing that Rhino Mocks is normally so good at preserving are lost. Here’s an example (using Rhino Mocks 3.3 and .NET 2.0): [Test] public void Main_Form_Should_Show_Start_Panel_On_Load() { MockRepository mockRepository = new MockRepository(); IMainFormView mockView = mockRepository.DynamicMock<IMainFormView>(); IEventRaiser loadEventRaiser = GetEventRaiserFor(delegate { mockView.Load += null; });...
Post a Comment
Read more