Approved
Last Updated: 25 Feb 2019 16:35 by ADMIN
Created by: Mihail
Comments: 0
Type: Feature Request
0
Implement support for future mocking of non-public classes.
Approved
Last Updated: 25 Feb 2019 14:50 by ADMIN
Implement support for future mocking of public class with non-public arguments.
Such example is the future mocking of the class Timer with a private callback.
In Development
Last Updated: 25 Feb 2019 08:55 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.
Approved
Last Updated: 14 Feb 2019 08:30 by ADMIN

Hi I have encountered what I think is a bug.

I would expected the following unit test to pass. It does not.

The example is distilled from a more complex case.

Is it not supported to have other threads create mocks?

[Fact] public async Task Fails() { var iTask = Task.Run(() => Mock.Create<I>()); var i = await iTask; EA expectedArgs = new EA(); EA receivedArgs = null; i.Done += (sender, ea) => receivedArgs = ea;

i.Raise(x => x.Done += null, expectedArgs); Assert.Equal(expectedArgs, receivedArgs); } public class EA : EventArgs { } public interface I { event EventHandler<EA> Done; }


Approved
Last Updated: 17 Jan 2019 15:08 by ADMIN
2019.R1 JustMock Test project templates need to be updated to support .Net Core, currently they are targeting just .Net Framework (see attached screen shot).
Completed
Last Updated: 16 Jan 2019 11:55 by ADMIN
The main point behind this request is to add new command line option to JustMockRunner in order to enable profiler without need for being registered, more details about this feature can be found on MSDN at https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee471451(v=vs.100).aspx
Completed
Last Updated: 16 Jan 2019 08:39 by ADMIN
Created by: Robert
Comments: 7
Type: Feature Request
13

			
Rejected
Last Updated: 12 Oct 2018 10:25 by ADMIN
Created by: Nick
Comments: 1
Type: Feature Request
0
If I define a fluent API, I might have an interface such as this:

public interface IRegistrar { 

IRegistrar UsingThis(object someThing);

IRegistrar UsingThat<TThatThing>() }

If I create a mock of this using the default Behaviour.RecursiveLoose and make no arrangements, calls to the methods will return new mocks of the type, rather than the same instance that was called. 

It would be nice to have a behaviour type that can return the same instance (in this case the mocked instance) without having to define a stub for each method call.

My code under test might look like:

IRegistrar reg;

reg

  .UsingThis(new object())

  .UsingThat<int>();

Currently, a test on the second call will fail if written against the mock assigned to 'reg'.
Approved
Last Updated: 12 Oct 2018 08:32 by Troy
Created by: Troy
Comments: 0
Type: Feature Request
3
Allow future mocking of an entire class, including a default of DoNothing() for all methods in the class, rather than requiring each method to be future mocked separately.
Approved
Last Updated: 08 Oct 2018 10:50 by ADMIN
Currently, there is no out of  the box support for passing "out" and "ref" parameters for nonpublic API.
Merged
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: 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.
Approved
Last Updated: 23 Jul 2018 13:39 by Stefan
Approved
Last Updated: 23 Jul 2018 13:31 by Kaloyan
Current behavior:
Mock.Arrange(xxx).IgnoreInstance();    //mock all future instances of the type on which I set an expectation.


Feature Request:
Mock.Arrange(xxx).IgnoreInstance().Next();    //mock the next instance of the type on which I set an expectation.

...and even better...

Mock.Arrange(xxx).IgnoreInstance().Skip(3).Next();   //mock the 4th instance of a type on which I set an expectation.
Approved
Last Updated: 23 Jul 2018 13:16 by Stefan
I'm a user that is refactoring a legacy system which has a certain component to which I do not have the source. It uses COM interop heavily. I would like to be able to future-mock instances of RCW's so that I can write tests for that component.
Approved
Last Updated: 23 Jul 2018 13:10 by Stefan
Created by: Stefan
Comments: 0
Type: Feature Request
0
I'd like to be able to intercept and arrange access to fields on any class.

public class Dependency
{
  public int A;
}
..
var dep = new Dependency();
Mock.Arrange(() => dep.A).Returns(5);
Mock.ArrangeSet(() => dep.A = Arg.AnyInt).DoInstead(...);
Approved
Last Updated: 23 Jul 2018 13:04 by ADMIN
ADMIN
Created by: Vladi
Comments: 0
Type: Feature Request
2
Integrate with Simple Injector: https://simpleinjector.org/index.html similar to https://www.nuget.org/packages/JustMock.Unity and https://www.nuget.org/packages/JustMock.Mef/
Approved
Last Updated: 23 Jul 2018 12:55 by Brian
Created by: Brian
Comments: 0
Type: Feature Request
18
Any plans to support Windows 10 UWP/UAP projects? I tried the existing version but ran into several roadblocks:

Attempt #1 (does not work):
Cannot add JustMockLite to a Windows 10 Unit Test project via NuGet because UAP projects are not supported.

Attempt #2 (does not work)
Add a reference to the pre-compiled binaries. The Win10 project allows the reference, but when the tests run, it results in a bunch of 'Could not find assembly System.Core v3.5.0.0' exceptions. Tried installing .Net 3.5 but didnt help. Tried building from source and retargeting the framework to 4, 4.5, 4.5.2, and 4.6, but that didnt work (see Attempt #3).
Just a note: when Visual Studio 2015 was in RC status, we had this working. We simply added a reference to the pre-compiled Telerik.JustMocks assembly and things worked. Updating to VS RTM though broke things.

Attempt #3 (does not work)
Compile JustMockLite from source.  VS complains that the Win10 Unit Test project is of type NetCore and the JustMock assembly targets NetFramework.

Attempt #4 (does not work)
Add reference to Telerik.JustMock.Portable to Windows 10 Unit Test project. This allows the project to compile and run, but any tests using Mock.Create() fail because System.Diagnostics.StackTrace.ctor is not supported.

Completed
Last Updated: 01 Mar 2018 15:48 by ADMIN
Created by: G
Comments: 1
Type: Feature Request
1
Our team is moving to VSTS and not having an official solution to run JustMock tests through their build system is a deal-breaker.
1 2 3