diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'googlemock/docs/cook_book.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | googlemock/docs/cook_book.md | 75 |
1 files changed, 38 insertions, 37 deletions
diff --git a/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md b/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md index ea55ab35..51eb94a9 100644 --- a/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md +++ b/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md @@ -421,7 +421,7 @@ sadly they are side effects of C++'s limitations): `NiceMock<StrictMock<MockFoo> >`) is **not** supported. 2. `NiceMock<MockFoo>` and `StrictMock<MockFoo>` may not work correctly if the destructor of `MockFoo` is not virtual. We would like to fix this, but it - requires cleaning up existing tests. http://b/28934720 tracks the issue. + requires cleaning up existing tests. 3. During the constructor or destructor of `MockFoo`, the mock object is *not* nice or strict. This may cause surprises if the constructor or destructor calls a mock method on `this` object. (This behavior, however, is consistent @@ -1024,9 +1024,8 @@ using ::testing::Lt; says that the first argument of `InRange()` must not be 0, and must be less than the second argument. -The expression inside `With()` must be a matcher of type -`Matcher< ::std::tuple<A1, ..., An> >`, where `A1`, ..., `An` are the types of -the function arguments. +The expression inside `With()` must be a matcher of type `Matcher<std::tuple<A1, +..., An>>`, where `A1`, ..., `An` are the types of the function arguments. You can also write `AllArgs(m)` instead of `m` inside `.With()`. The two forms are equivalent, but `.With(AllArgs(Lt()))` is more readable than `.With(Lt())`. @@ -1054,8 +1053,8 @@ complete list. Note that if you want to pass the arguments to a predicate of your own (e.g. `.With(Args<0, 1>(Truly(&MyPredicate)))`), that predicate MUST be written to -take a `::std::tuple` as its argument; gMock will pass the `n` selected -arguments as *one* single tuple to the predicate. +take a `std::tuple` as its argument; gMock will pass the `n` selected arguments +as *one* single tuple to the predicate. ### Using Matchers as Predicates @@ -1331,11 +1330,11 @@ class BarPlusBazEqMatcher : public MatcherInterface<const Foo&> { return (foo.bar() + foo.baz()) == expected_sum_; } - void DescribeTo(::std::ostream* os) const override { + void DescribeTo(std::ostream* os) const override { *os << "bar() + baz() equals " << expected_sum_; } - void DescribeNegationTo(::std::ostream* os) const override { + void DescribeNegationTo(std::ostream* os) const override { *os << "bar() + baz() does not equal " << expected_sum_; } private: @@ -2175,7 +2174,7 @@ own precedence order distinct from the `ON_CALL` precedence order. ### Using Functions/Methods/Functors/Lambdas as Actions {#FunctionsAsActions} If the built-in actions don't suit you, you can use an existing callable -(function, `std::function`, method, functor, lambda as an action. +(function, `std::function`, method, functor, lambda) as an action. <!-- GOOGLETEST_CM0024 DO NOT DELETE --> @@ -2203,7 +2202,8 @@ class Helper { .WillOnce(&CalculateSum) .WillRepeatedly(Invoke(NewPermanentCallback(Sum3, 1))); EXPECT_CALL(foo, ComplexJob(_)) - .WillOnce(Invoke(&helper, &Helper::ComplexJob)); + .WillOnce(Invoke(&helper, &Helper::ComplexJob)) + .WillOnce([] { return true; }) .WillRepeatedly([](int x) { return x > 0; }); foo.Sum(5, 6); // Invokes CalculateSum(5, 6). @@ -2213,11 +2213,11 @@ class Helper { ``` The only requirement is that the type of the function, etc must be *compatible* -with the signature of the mock function, meaning that the latter's arguments can -be implicitly converted to the corresponding arguments of the former, and the -former's return type can be implicitly converted to that of the latter. So, you -can invoke something whose type is *not* exactly the same as the mock function, -as long as it's safe to do so - nice, huh? +with the signature of the mock function, meaning that the latter's arguments (if +it takes any) can be implicitly converted to the corresponding arguments of the +former, and the former's return type can be implicitly converted to that of the +latter. So, you can invoke something whose type is *not* exactly the same as the +mock function, as long as it's safe to do so - nice, huh? **`Note:`{.escaped}** @@ -2268,19 +2268,20 @@ TEST_F(FooTest, Test) { ### Invoking a Function/Method/Functor/Lambda/Callback Without Arguments -`Invoke()` is very useful for doing actions that are more complex. It passes the -mock function's arguments to the function, etc being invoked such that the -callee has the full context of the call to work with. If the invoked function is -not interested in some or all of the arguments, it can simply ignore them. +`Invoke()` passes the mock function's arguments to the function, etc being +invoked such that the callee has the full context of the call to work with. If +the invoked function is not interested in some or all of the arguments, it can +simply ignore them. Yet, a common pattern is that a test author wants to invoke a function without -the arguments of the mock function. `Invoke()` allows her to do that using a -wrapper function that throws away the arguments before invoking an underlining -nullary function. Needless to say, this can be tedious and obscures the intent -of the test. +the arguments of the mock function. She could do that using a wrapper function +that throws away the arguments before invoking an underlining nullary function. +Needless to say, this can be tedious and obscures the intent of the test. -`InvokeWithoutArgs()` solves this problem. It's like `Invoke()` except that it -doesn't pass the mock function's arguments to the callee. Here's an example: +There are two solutions to this problem. First, you can pass any callable of +zero args as an action. Alternatively, use `InvokeWithoutArgs()`, which is like +`Invoke()` except that it doesn't pass the mock function's arguments to the +callee. Here's an example of each: ```cpp using ::testing::_; @@ -2297,7 +2298,7 @@ bool Job2(int n, char c) { ... } ... MockFoo foo; EXPECT_CALL(foo, ComplexJob(_)) - .WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs(Job1)) + .WillOnce([] { Job1(); }); .WillOnce(InvokeWithoutArgs(NewPermanentCallback(Job2, 5, 'a'))); foo.ComplexJob(10); // Invokes Job1(). @@ -3565,7 +3566,7 @@ class MatchResultListener { MatchResultListener& operator<<(const T& x); // Returns the underlying ostream. - ::std::ostream* stream(); + std::ostream* stream(); }; template <typename T> @@ -3578,10 +3579,10 @@ class MatcherInterface { virtual bool MatchAndExplain(T x, MatchResultListener* listener) const = 0; // Describes this matcher to an ostream. - virtual void DescribeTo(::std::ostream* os) const = 0; + virtual void DescribeTo(std::ostream* os) const = 0; // Describes the negation of this matcher to an ostream. - virtual void DescribeNegationTo(::std::ostream* os) const; + virtual void DescribeNegationTo(std::ostream* os) const; }; ``` @@ -3609,11 +3610,11 @@ class DivisibleBy7Matcher : public MatcherInterface<int> { return (n % 7) == 0; } - void DescribeTo(::std::ostream* os) const override { + void DescribeTo(std::ostream* os) const override { *os << "is divisible by 7"; } - void DescribeNegationTo(::std::ostream* os) const override { + void DescribeNegationTo(std::ostream* os) const override { *os << "is not divisible by 7"; } }; @@ -3995,7 +3996,7 @@ ACTION_TEMPLATE(DuplicateArg, // Note the comma between int and k: HAS_2_TEMPLATE_PARAMS(int, k, typename, T), AND_1_VALUE_PARAMS(output)) { - *output = T(::std::get<k>(args)); + *output = T(std::get<k>(args)); } ``` @@ -4087,7 +4088,7 @@ class ActionInterface { // // For example, if F is int(bool, const string&), then Result would - // be int, and ArgumentTuple would be ::std::tuple<bool, const string&>. + // be int, and ArgumentTuple would be std::tuple<bool, const string&>. virtual Result Perform(const ArgumentTuple& args) = 0; }; ``` @@ -4102,8 +4103,8 @@ typedef int IncrementMethod(int*); class IncrementArgumentAction : public ActionInterface<IncrementMethod> { public: - int Perform(const ::std::tuple<int*>& args) override { - int* p = ::std::get<0>(args); // Grabs the first argument. + int Perform(const std::tuple<int*>& args) override { + int* p = std::get<0>(args); // Grabs the first argument. return *p++; } }; @@ -4148,8 +4149,8 @@ class ReturnSecondArgumentAction { public: template <typename Result, typename ArgumentTuple> Result Perform(const ArgumentTuple& args) const { - // To get the i-th (0-based) argument, use ::std::get(args). - return ::std::get<1>(args); + // To get the i-th (0-based) argument, use std::get(args). + return std::get<1>(args); } }; ``` |