You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
some_class c;
`EXPECT_CALL(mock, func).with_args(c);
// ... act on UUT, which should trigger a call to 'func()' with 'c' as an argument
`FAIL_UNLESS(mock.check())
If the UUT doesn't call 'func', the test passes, though I would expect it to fail.
Since I forgot to add ' = new()' to 'c', I instructed the mock to expect 'null' as a value for the arg to 'func'. SVMock doesn't interpret this as a specification to have 'func' called at least one time. I think GMock does this, though.
Would we want 'with_args(...)' to play around with the cardinality of function calls like GMock does?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I have simple test like this:
If the UUT doesn't call 'func', the test passes, though I would expect it to fail.
Since I forgot to add ' = new()' to 'c', I instructed the mock to expect 'null' as a value for the arg to 'func'. SVMock doesn't interpret this as a specification to have 'func' called at least one time. I think GMock does this, though.
Would we want 'with_args(...)' to play around with the cardinality of function calls like GMock does?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: