I have a problem where concrete class is not able to be mocked. I see recently in an other post that the problem was corrected just after the build was released but I'm not able to see if this is correct because no nightly build is available now. Is nightly build just available for registered users?

I'm probably doing something wrong here, but I can't figure out why Mock.Assert Occurs in my case isn't showing the mocked method called.  Here's the code, in brief:

Test code:

        [TestMethod]
      public void ProcessFilterResult_MailMessageDate_AfterLatestDBDate_ProcessesMessage_Test()
      {
            BounceHandler_Accessor target = new BounceHandler_Accessor();
            var data = Mock.Create<IDataAccess>();
            target._dal = data;
            Mock.Arrange( () => data.GetLatestEmailDate() ).Returns( DateTime.Now.AddDays( -7 ) );
            target._recordToDatabase = true;
 
            var result = Mock.Create<BounceFilterResult>();
 
            Cforge.Net.Mail.MailMessage msg = new Cforge.Net.Mail.MailMessage();
            msg.Date = new Cforge.Net.Mime.Headers.MailDateTime(DateTime.Now);
            msg.BodyText = @"X-ETC-MailingID: 00001
X-ETC-MailflowID: 10000";
 
            Mock.Arrange( () => result.MailMessage ).Returns( msg );
 
            target.ProcessFilterResult( result );
            Mock.Assert( () => data.RecordBouncedEmail( result, "00001", "10000" ), Occurs.Once() );
 
      }
the ProcessFilterResult checks some dates and a flag on the target, all of which pass. It uses some regex to find matches in the MailMessage.BodyText, which also match the asserted method call.

Stepping through the code, I watch the result and data proxies match up to the Mocked objects and then watch the target._dal.RecordBouncedEmail() method call being called, but when I get back to the test code I still get the following exception.

Telerik.JustMock.MockAssertionException was unhandled by user code
  Message=Expected call on the mock should be once, but it was called 0 time(s).
  Source=Telerik.JustMock

Can anyone give me some idea what the problem might be?

Hi,

I've need to mock some calls made on a concrete object.

In the beta it was working fine, but I've now upgraded to RTM and the code I wrote to mock out the call is no longer being mocked.  I'm mocking the object like so:

MyConcreteObject stubConcreteObject = Mock.Create<MyConcreteObject>(Behavior.Strict);

And arranging like so:

Mock.Arrange(() => stubConcreteObject.ContainsSomthing(Arg.IsAny<ISomething>())).Returns(true);

But when I run my code (I've tried with the explicit behaviour being set and not setting it), it always goes into the actual code.  This was working in the beta, but appears to be broken now.

Thanks,
John

I've had to downgrade back to the previous Beta, and now when ever I try doing anything with a mocked concrete I get the MockException "Opps , there were some error intercepting target call."

I've checked the registry, and no lingering JustMock references that I can see in there.  I've also deleted EVERY JustMock dll I can find, but to no avail.

StackTrace:


What am I missing?

Hi,

I try to use the mocking framework with visual basic and I try to figure it out what is the best manner to fake a method.

When I try to fake a function, the syntaxe is very nice like this:

      <Test()> _
      Public Sub TestDelete()
         Dim fileManager As JustMockFile.IFileManager

         fileManager = Mock.Create(Of JustMockFile.IFileManager)()

         Mock.Arrange(Function() fileManager.Delete(Arg.AnyString)).Returns(False)

         Assert.IsTrue(fileManager.Delete(""))
      End Sub

As you can see, the keyword "Function()" is use and when I call the "Delete" function of the FileManager, I have a full support with intellisense to define possibles values of each arguments.

The problem is when I try to fake a method because I don't know how to call Arrange correctly except with the keyword "AddressOf". The problem with "AddressOf" is that I don't have a full support with intellisense and i'm limited with 9 parameters.

      <Test()> _
      Public Sub TestCreate()
         Dim fileManager As JustMockFile.IFileManager

         fileManager = Mock.Create(Of JustMockFile.IFileManager)()

         Mock.Arrange(AddressOf fileManager.Create, Arg.AnyString)

         Mock.Assert(AddressOf fileManager.Create, Arg.AnyString, Occurs.Once)
      End Sub

I have full of legacy applications where many methods have more then 9 parameters. Any ways, I don't have full support with Intellisense.

I want to be able to fake a method like this:

      <Test()> _
      Public Sub TestCreate()
         Dim fileManager As JustMockFile.IFileManager

         fileManager = Mock.Create(Of JustMockFile.IFileManager)()

         Mock.Arrange(function() fileManager.Create(Arg.AnyString))

         Mock.Assert(function() fileManager.Create(Arg.AnyString) Occurs.Once)
      End Sub

Is there any way to fake method like a function with Visual Basic... with the "Function()" keyword?

Thank you very much

I'm working on a test case against a static method that makes a few calls on an object, and I'm trying to make those calls do nothing.  The issue I'm having is that this:

TransactionHeaderViewModel

 

ticket = Mock.Create<TransactionHeaderViewModel>();

 

fails with the following:
Test method POSUnitTests.TransactionServiceTest.SaveTransactionTest threw exception:  System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object..

Telerik.JustMock.DynamicProxy.MethodInvocation.Continue() in c:\B\Basilisk\Basilisk CI Build\Sources\CodeBase\Telerik.JustMock\DynamicProxy\MethodInvocation.cs: line 150
Intercept(IInvocation invocation) in c:\B\Basilisk\Basilisk CI Build\Sources\CodeBase\Telerik.JustMock\Interceptors\ProxyInterceptor.cs: line 35
TransactionHeaderViewModel_Proxy_a39192a5eca04cbbb79efb55f2387785.GetHashCode(MethodInvocation , Int32 , Boolean )
TransactionHeaderViewModel_Proxy_a39192a5eca04cbbb79efb55f2387785.GetHashCode()
get_Instance() in c:\B\Basilisk\Basilisk CI Build\Sources\CodeBase\Telerik.JustMock\MockObject.cs: line 44
Telerik.JustMock.Mock.Create(Type target, BehaviorMode mode, Object[] args) in c:\B\Basilisk\Basilisk CI Build\Sources\CodeBase\Telerik.JustMock\Mock.cs: line 354
Telerik.JustMock.Mock.Create(Type target, Object[] args) in c:\B\Basilisk\Basilisk CI Build\Sources\CodeBase\Telerik.JustMock\Mock.cs: line 339
Telerik.JustMock.Mock.Create[T]() in c:\B\Basilisk\Basilisk CI Build\Sources\CodeBase\Telerik.JustMock\Mock.cs: line 328
POSUnitTests.TransactionServiceTest.SaveTransactionTest() in c:\tfs\Point of Sale\POSApp\Main\Source\POSUnitTests\TransactionServiceTest.cs: line 151


If I just do a TransactionHeaderViewModel ticket = new TransactionHeaderViewModel(); instead, then the calls to Mock.Arrange(() => ticket.SetLineNumbers()).DoNothing(); don't actually work, when debugging the test case you can see that the actual code is called.  I also tried making SetLineNumbers() a virtual, but that caused the "Opps" error.

I thought that it was having an issue with what the constructor was doing, so I commented out everything in the constructor, but still get the same error (in fact, the error above is from that simplified case).

Any thoughts, or is this something that's already fixed in the current builds?  I'm on the 528.5 beta release.


Thanks,
     Justin

A feature I would really like to see to assist with using JustMock is a way of setting up unit tests far more easily.

In my situation I am dealing with calls from a silverlight client that are passing collections of objects created originally by linq to sql. All the examples show using JustMock for testing of very simple methods - currency conversion etc. While I realise there is no limit to the complexity of what can be setup, it is very difficult to set these types of parameters up by hand.

What I would really like is a way to hit a breakpoint in my code, and then be able to select "JustMock This" off a menu somehow.

This would clone the current arguments into a repeatable test.  I wouldnt care if the clone was done in code, or the arguments were persisted in some way. I just dont want to have to recreate them all by hand.

It would open the door not just to simplified set up of unit tests, it would also be a powerful debugging tool as well, as sometimes the operations to get to a bug can be complex, and it is a real pain to keep going through the motions just to get back to the same method again.

If there is a way of doing all this with the existing product, please let me know how. If not, what do you think of this as a feature?

Tom

Is it possible to mock non-public members using JustMock?

I'm trying to mock out a call that takes in nullable GUIDs, unfortunately when I try arranging the call:

Hi,