Recent changes to bugs

MockDataReader.findColumnIndexForName doesn't work

Anonymous — Sun, 30 Oct 2005 18:42:13 -0000

MockDataReader.cs, lines 516-522 currently read

for (int i = 0; i < _schemaTable.Columns.Count; ++i) {
if (_schemaTable.Columns[i].ColumnName.Equals(name))
{
return i;
}
}

They should read:

for (int i = 0; i < _schemaTable.Rows.Count; ++i) {
if (_schemaTable.Rows[i]["ColumnName"].Equals(name))
{
return i;
}
}

Since schema tables store data about each column
returned in an IDataReader as a separate row of data
(per the MSDN documentation on IDataReader).

Thanks,
Matt (matthinz@nospamgmail.com, minus no spam)

ExpectNoCall expects a call

Fri, 15 Jul 2005 12:30:48 -0000

When I call ExpectNoCall("Set") on a DynamicMock,
Verify() throws an AssertionException: "1 more call(s)
were expected for Set".

Does not cast return value well

Choy Rim — Tue, 10 May 2005 17:36:30 -0000

If your method returns a long and in your expectation
you specify an int as the return value, the method call
fails with a "Specified cast is invalid" exception.

For example, consider the following method:

long GetLength();

When we make the following expectation:

mock.ExpectAndReturn("GetLength", 123);

and then call it.

mockObject.GetLength();

it will fail with a cast exception.

Method Call Requires an Expectation

Chad M. Gross — Fri, 06 May 2005 20:50:03 -0000

We were previously using v.7.2 that allowed for the
calling of a dynamic mocked interface method without
an expectation attached to it. By looking over the
source, it looks like since v .7.5 this is no longer
possible. In the current version, v.7.6, the Call method
receives an IMethodCallExpectation from the
nextExpectation method. This method will return null if
there are no expectations and you are not strict. The
Call method is not handling null being returned and
therefore you get the NullReferenceException. In the
v.7.2 implementation, the code would have been:

IMethodCallExpectation e = nextExpectation
(methodCall);
if (e == null)
return null;

return e.CheckCallAndSendResponse(methodCall);

Here is a test that fails in the current version:

public interface ITest
{
void MethodTest();
}

[TestFixture]
public class TestDynamicMock
{
[Test]
public void
TestDynamicMockMethodWithoutExpectations()
{
DynamicMock dynamicMock =
new DynamicMock(typeof(ITest));

    ITest test = \(ITest\)

dynamicMock.Object;
test.MethodTest();
}
}

MethodCall::MethodName property has "somewhat-invalid" logic

Chad M. Gross — Tue, 03 May 2005 15:40:28 -0000

The code in the MethodCall::MethodName get property
is like:

string text1 = this._method.Name;
if (!text1.StartsWith("get_") && !text1.StartsWith("set_"))
{
return text1;
}
return text1.Substring(4);

It is indicating that if the MethodInfo::Name begins with
either "set_" or "get_ " it must be a property which is
not necessarily the case. Not probably the biggest
issue you're facing but the code should be :

string text1 = this._method.Name;
if ((!text1.StartsWith("get_") && !text1.StartsWith
("set_")) || !_method.IsSpecialName)
{
return text1;
}
return text1.Substring(4);

/Chad

Incomplete rename in MockObject.cs

Gary Feldman — Tue, 26 Apr 2005 02:20:48 -0000

It appears that the most recent checkin of
MockObject.cs (1.20) renamed the name variable to be
_name. The renaming missed one, specifically in the
constructor.

Furthermore, it was changed from protected to private.
This breaks the NewMockObjectFile.cs template files
(both versions, 2002 and 2003) in two ways: The
occurrence of this.name wasn't changed to this._name,
and it's no longer visible given the change to private.
The intent of this change isn't clear ot me.

(This is a good example of why I dislike the leading
underscore convention - it's too easy to misread.)

Tests fail if decimal symbol is something else than \'.\'

Kari Hirvi — Sat, 02 Apr 2005 10:02:37 -0000

The summary pretty much explains the whole thing.
I ran the DotNetMock.Tests in NUnit and I get few failing
tests if the decimal symbol is not a dot, i.e., '.'

Maybe that's Verify() problem?

Actually, XP allows you to put anything for the decimal
symbol, so perhaps you need to use CultureInfo or
something to get the actual separator.

"N/A" if can't stringify argument

Choy Rim — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 16:41:20 -0000

If predicate on an argument is not satisified,
DotNetMock will throw and AssertionException and try to
output the call and arguments in the assertion failure.
If the argument throws an exception while DotNetMock
tries to convert it to string, then DotNetMock
propagates this inner exception outward. Making for an
extremely confusing message.

Instead, DotNetMock should produce "N/A" for arguments
that cannot be stringified.

Can't simulate rollback in case of commit failure

Kari Hirvi — Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:44:47 -0000

1) in your code that you're trying to test, you have try-
catch block, which catches errors in case of transaction
commit failure

2) try to simulate transaction-commit failure by setting
an exception for the transaction mock object

3) the commit fails and control moves to the catch block

4) but you can't use mock rollback, because it detects
that the mock commit-method has been executed and
throws an exception.

The mock transaction should detect if the commit is
forced to throw an exception and allow to rollback later.

Is the current behaviour bug or feature ?

Assertion Failure causes exception in MbUnit

Anonymous — Wed, 16 Mar 2005 20:50:33 -0000

DotNetMock.Assertion.AssertEquals(String message,
Object expectedObject, Object actualObject)

Generates a call to
MbUnit.Core.Framework.Assert.AreEqual(Object
expected, Object actual, String format, Object[] args)
(with args == null)

If this assertion fails then an ArgumentNullException is
thrown in

System.String.Format(String format, Object[] args)