Completed
Last Updated: 16 Jan 2019 08:39 by ADMIN
Created by: Robert
Comments: 7
Type: Feature Request
13

			
Completed
Last Updated: 16 Sep 2021 08:43 by ADMIN
Created by: Mihail
Comments: 1
Type: Feature Request
9
Implement support for executing JustMock tests on Linux
Completed
Last Updated: 29 Apr 2014 10:42 by Nacho
JustMock should work in multi-threaded scenarios.
Completed
Last Updated: 30 Jun 2015 11:38 by Joe
Created by: Kaloyan
Comments: 1
Type: Feature Request
8
JustMock should be able to mock in WP8 assemblies.
Completed
Last Updated: 02 Jun 2020 15:17 by ADMIN
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.
Completed
Last Updated: 04 Jun 2013 06:40 by Keith
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.
Completed
Last Updated: 23 May 2013 13:14 by Kaloyan
ADMIN
Created by: Mihail
Comments: 1
Type: Feature Request
3
JustMock should be able to mock private methods in Silverlight.
Completed
Last Updated: 19 Jan 2022 13:28 by ADMIN

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.

Completed
Last Updated: 14 Oct 2015 08:23 by Stefan
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
}
Completed
Last Updated: 23 Jul 2018 13:47 by Nacho
Created by: Stefan
Comments: 3
Type: Feature Request
3
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.
Completed
Last Updated: 12 Sep 2018 14:04 by ADMIN
ADMIN
Created by: Kamen Ivanov
Comments: 1
Type: Feature Request
3
It would be good if we could use named parameters inside Mock.Arrange method.
Completed
Last Updated: 08 Jun 2023 11:59 by ADMIN
Created by: Tomer
Comments: 12
Type: Feature Request
2

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.

 

Completed
Last Updated: 12 May 2022 07:53 by ADMIN
Created by: Ivo
Comments: 3
Type: Feature Request
2

C# 8 introduces default interface method implementations. Attempt to mock such methods with JustMock in elevated mode fails. The following example illustrates the issue:

public interface IMyInterface
{
    int IntProperty { get => 0; }
}


[TestClass]
public class UnitTest1
{
    [TestMethod]
    public void TestMethod1()
    {
        var mock = Mock.Create<IMyInterface>();
        Mock.Arrange(() => mock.IntProperty).Returns(1);

        Assert.AreEqual(1, mock.IntProperty);
    }
}

 

 

 
Completed
Last Updated: 20 Mar 2014 12:38 by ADMIN
I'd like to be able to make recursive arrangements like Mock.Arrange(() => a.B.C.D).Returns(5) and to simultaneously specify that this arrangement should work on any instance, not just 'a'. If I simply use IgnoreInstance() in this case it will make an arrangement for the instance on which 'D' is called and not 'B' - so it doesn't work as I want it to.

What I'd like to do is simply state Mock.Arrange(() => Arg.IsAny<IFoo>().B.C.D).Returns(5) - in other words "Arrange for any object of type IFoo, when ".B.C.D" is called on it, that the value of D is 5.
Completed
Last Updated: 03 Nov 2020 13:28 by ADMIN
The JustMock profiler should be added to the commercial NuGet package distributed from the Telerik private NuGet server.
Completed
Last Updated: 14 Oct 2015 08:48 by Stefan
eg

// Act
testSUT.Execute(1);

// Assert
myMockThing.Assert(x => x.Foo, Occurs.Once(), "calling Execute() with 1 should execute Foo due to blah");
Completed
Last Updated: 05 Dec 2019 14:51 by ADMIN
The JutMock task for Azure Pipeline is missing the option to execute the tests with Visual Studio 2019. Check the attached screenshot.
Completed
Last Updated: 24 Sep 2019 10:03 by ADMIN
Created by: Lyubomir
Comments: 1
Type: Feature Request
2
Currently JustMock does not support mocking non-public generic methods. There are couple of possible workarounds but the need for proper implementation for mocking the language feature is still required.
Completed
Last Updated: 14 May 2013 12:12 by ADMIN
Please allow automocking support for classes with multiple constructors. This is important for projects not using DI containers but using dependency injection. A classic example is ASP.NET MVC and ASP.NET Web API where standard routing requires a constructor with no parameters. When using DI via constructors but without containers, the overloaded ctor specifies services/repositories and the default ctor passes the default services/repositories.
Completed
Last Updated: 17 May 2013 12:29 by Stefan
ADMIN
Created by: Mihail
Comments: 0
Type: Feature Request
1
By default JustMock matches the mock parameters via Object.ReferenceEquals(...). It would be nice to match the mock parameters via Object.Equals(...) as well.

http://www.telerik.com/community/forums/justmock/general-discussions/parameter-matching.aspx
1 2 3