JustMock should work in multi-threaded scenarios.

JustMock should be able to mock in WP8 assemblies.

Hi,


Since I upgraded my JustMock I was unable to debug ASP.NET projects. I accidentally found a resolution to the problem here:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/19415275/asp-net-mvc4-code-not-running

"If you are using Telerik JustMock as a mocking framework and have recently updated it to the 2013 Q3 version, it causes this exact problem. I was able to resolve this issue by uninstalling the mocking framework and installing the 2013 Q2 version."

So I uninstalled JustMock and everything came to normal.


Regards,
Ovidiu

Creating a share link with Visual Studio Live Share does not work if you have the JustMock profiler enabled. We specifically have to disable the JustMock profiler in order for VS Live Share to create sharing links. This has been reproduced by several different members of our team.

Could this please be looked into? Thanks!

Docker is a container acting like an isolated environment. Research how the JustMock profiler can be registered into such container.
Hosted VSTS should work on the same principle. Research how the registry could be accessed through VSTS extension or other tools.

I use NCrunch, a popular test runner. But it cannot seem to activate the JustMock profiler properly. So tests that require use of the JustMock profiler do not work properly.

When a breakpoint is added inside an async test that uses JustMock the debugger is failing to hit it. 

To reproduce the issue follow the next steps:

1. Open the attached project

2. Create a breakpoint at the first arrangement in the async test method.

3. Start debugging the async test

Result: the breakpoint is not hit.

The issue is observed for both .NET Core and .NET Framework.

The internal (non-public) events are not handled properly by JustMock, there is no indication for error, Raise arrangement simply does not working as expected. The following sample reproduces the issue:

namespace TestExample
{
    public class ClassWithEvents
    {
        internal event EventHandler<EventArgs> InternalEventToTest;
    }

    [TestClass()]
    public class EventTests
    {
        [TestMethod]
        public void ClassWithEvents_InternalEventTest()
        {
            //Arrange
            bool eventRaised = false;
            ClassWithEvents classWithEvents = Mock.Create<ClassWithEvents>();
            classWithEvents.InternalEventToTest += (object sender, EventArgs e) =>
            {
                eventRaised = true;
            };

            // Act
            Mock.Raise(() => classWithEvents.InternalEventToTest += null, new EventArgs());

            // Assert
            Assert.IsTrue(eventRaised);
        }
    }
}

if you use the C# using declaration and have JustMock advanced (elevated) mode enabled, the runtime will throw an InvalidProgramException.

Find below the sample code that demonstrates the issue:

public class TestClass : IDisposable
{
    public void Dispose()
    {
    }
}

[TestClass]
public class Fixture
{
    public interface ITest { }

    [TestMethod]
    public async Task Test()
    {
        ITest mock = Mock.Create<ITest>();
        using TestClass test = new();
    }
}

JustMock should be able to mock private methods in Silverlight.

We have some mission critical code that catches all exceptions and recovers from them in various ways.  I would like to be able to use Mock.Create<MyClass>(Behavior.Strict) so that I can know that none of the methods on MyClass are being called besides the ones I explicitly Mock.Arrange.  However, this results in the methods throwing exceptions which are then caught by my application and recovered from so I never see them.

I would like something like this, but where I didn't have to manually arrange every method on the class and instead have some Behavior that I could give to Mock.Create that would result in all of the arranges being auto-generated.  I could then manually arrange anything I didn't want to have OccursNever on, just like you can override the exceptions thrown by Behavior.Strict.


class MyClass
{
    public void Method1() { }
    public void Method2() { }
    public void Method3() { }
}
 
class ClassUnderTest
{
    public void DoSomething(MyClass myClass)
    {
        myClass.Method3();
    }
}
 
[Test]
void MyClass_methods_are_never_called()
{
    // ARRANGE
    var myClass = Mock.Create<MyClass>();
    Mock.Arrange(() => myClass.Method1()).OccursNever();
    Mock.Arrange(() => myClass.Method2()).OccursNever();
    Mock.Arrange(() => myClass.Method3()).OccursNever();
 
    // ACT
    var classUnderTest = new ClassUnderTest();
    classUnderTest.DoSomething(myClass);
 
    // ASSERT
    Mock.Assert(myClass); // this will fail
}

I want to be able to arrange the return value of `new` expressions, like Mock.Arrange(() => new FileInfo()).Returns(mockFileInfo).
Then, I expect that `new FileInfo()` will always return my mock instance.

It would be good if we could use named parameters inside Mock.Arrange method.

Currently, when the JustMock profiler is enabled it provides a performance hit on the test execution. This effect is expected because a profiler is involved.

What we can do is find a more optimized way of instrumenting the methods.

We're developing .net 5/core services, using Rider IDE and MacOS.

Please:

1. Add support to run JustMock under MacOS (profiler need to be supported, enabled issue, etc.), or if already supported, please provide instructions of how to activate it per test, for example using NUnit.

2. Add integration with Rider so all the process will be much easier.