third_party/ocmock/gtest_support.h - Issue 7031014: Support for better integration between OCMock and gtest.

Side by Side Diff: third_party/ocmock/gtest_support.h

Issue 7031014: Support for better integration between OCMock and gtest. (Closed) Base URL: svn://svn.chromium.org/chrome/trunk/src/

Patch Set: '' Created 9 years, 7 months ago

Use n/p to move between diff chunks; N/P to move between comments. Draft comments are only viewable by you.

Jump to:

View unified diff | Download patch | Annotate | Revision Log

« chrome/browser/ui/cocoa/bookmarks/bookmark_bar_controller_unittest.mm ('K') | « chrome/browser/ui/cocoa/wrench_menu/menu_tracked_root_view_unittest.mm ('k') | third_party/ocmock/gtest_support.mm » ('j') | third_party/ocmock/gtest_support.mm » ('J')
Toggle Intra-line Diffs ('i') | Expand Comments ('e') | Collapse Comments ('c') | Hide Comments ('s')

Property Changes:

Added: svn:eol-style
+ LF

OLD	NEW
(Empty)
	1 // Copyright (c) 2011 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.

	2 // Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be

	3 // found in the LICENSE file.

	4

	5 #ifndef THIRD_PARTY_OCMOCK_GTEST_SUPPORT_H_

	6 #define THIRD_PARTY_OCMOCK_GTEST_SUPPORT_H_

	7

	8
	Mark Mentovai 2011/05/16 22:16:38 I am unnecessary. (The blank line, that is.) I am unnecessary. (The blank line, that is.) TVL 2011/05/17 14:57:16 Done. Show quoted text On 2011/05/16 22:16:38, Mark Mentovai wrote: > I am unnecessary. > > (The blank line, that is.) Done.
	9 @class OCMockObject;

	10

	11 namespace testing {

	12 namespace mac {

	13

	14 // Calls -verify of the mock and traps the Objective-C exception that is

	15 // generated, adding it to the gtest failures and return true/false
	Mark Mentovai 2011/05/16 22:16:38 Proofread this comment. Proofread this comment. TVL 2011/05/17 14:57:16 Done. Show quoted text On 2011/05/16 22:16:38, Mark Mentovai wrote: > Proofread this comment. Done.
	16 // for if there was an exception. The result should be used in normal

	17 // gtest EXECPT_TRUE/ASSERT_TRUE fashion, for example:

	18 //

	19 // id mockFoo = [OCMockObject mockForClass:[Foo class]];
	Mark Mentovai 2011/05/16 22:16:38 Perhaps show an example of the traditional OCMock Perhaps show an example of the traditional OCMock -verify that your VerifyOCMock function is intended to replace. TVL 2011/05/17 14:57:16 Done. Show quoted text On 2011/05/16 22:16:38, Mark Mentovai wrote: > Perhaps show an example of the traditional OCMock -verify that your VerifyOCMock > function is intended to replace. Done.
	20 // ...

	21 // ASSERT_TRUE(testing::mac::VerifyOCMock(mockFoo));
	Mark Mentovai 2011/05/16 22:16:38 If you switch to EXPECT at the actual call sites, If you switch to EXPECT at the actual call sites, you should switch the example to EXPECT as well. Even if you wind up with a mix of EXPECT and ASSERT, I’d write EXPECT here because it’s generally preferable and in most of our tests, far more common. TVL 2011/05/17 14:57:16 Done. Show quoted text On 2011/05/16 22:16:38, Mark Mentovai wrote: > If you switch to EXPECT at the actual call sites, you should switch the example > to EXPECT as well. Even if you wind up with a mix of EXPECT and ASSERT, I’d > write EXPECT here because it’s generally preferable and in most of our tests, > far more common. Done.
	22 //

	23 bool VerifyOCMock(OCMockObject* mock);

	24
	Mark Mentovai 2011/05/16 22:16:38 Is it worth providing macros like EXPECT_OCMOCK_VE Is it worth providing macros like EXPECT_OCMOCK_VERIFY and ASSERT_OCMOCK_VERIFY? You can say no. Macros are evil, but it’s how gtest works, and \|EXPECT_TRUE(testing::mac::VerifyOCMock\| is a mouthful. TVL 2011/05/17 14:57:16 Done. Show quoted text On 2011/05/16 22:16:38, Mark Mentovai wrote: > Is it worth providing macros like EXPECT_OCMOCK_VERIFY and ASSERT_OCMOCK_VERIFY? > > You can say no. Macros are evil, but it’s how gtest works, and > \|EXPECT_TRUE(testing::mac::VerifyOCMock\| is a mouthful. Done.
	25 } // namespace mac

	26 } // namespace testing

	27

	28 #endif // THIRD_PARTY_OCMOCK_GTEST_SUPPORT_H_

OLD	NEW