Setting expectations in a function fails about trompeloeil HOT 6 OPEN

All expectations set up are valid in the scope of the set up, so ALLOW_CALL() in setupExpectations() is alive until the end of the function setupExpectations() and therefore no longer available in the line of the comment.

You can use NAMED_ALLOW_CALL() to bind the expectation to a variable that you choose maintain the lifetime of.

from trompeloeil.

Thanks for the quick answer.

I went looking for examples with NAMED_ALLOW_CALL and didn't find any, but I guess it would look something like the folowing:

struct Real {
  virtual int func() const = 0;
  virtual ~Real() = default;
};

struct Mock : public Real {
  MAKE_MOCK0(func, int(), const);
  ~Mock() override = default;
};

auto setupExpectations(Mock& obj) {
  return NAMED_ALLOW_CALL(obj, func()).RETURN(1729);
}

TEST_CASE("Expectations in their own function") {
  Mock mock;
  auto expectation = setupExpectations(mock);

  REQUIRE(mock.func() == 1729); // Throws exception saying No match for call of func with signature int() with.
}

However, my mock needs 10-15 expectations (don't ask), so I guess I will have to create a vector of std::vector<std::unique_ptr<expectation>> and push each NAMED_ALLOW_CALL into it, and then return the vector. This is a bit ugly. I suspect that people rarely use this feature.

Tomorrow, I'll make a PR for a documentation change to help other people.

from trompeloeil.

That looks right. I've done it that way too. The vector is nice. I'm a bit surprised that you didn't find any examples of NAMED_ALLOW_CALL. Here's the entry in the reference manual: https://github.com/rollbear/trompeloeil/blob/main/docs/reference.md#NAMED_ALLOW_CALL, with an example. I guess there's not a good enough entry point to find it?

from trompeloeil.

I was looking in the cookbook, which seemed the best place to start. All the examples there were ALLOW_CALL or REQUIRE_CALL, so I presumed that's what I should use. I'll add a section there tomorrow, when I have time.

from trompeloeil.

Good to see that I hadn't found missing functionality in your library :-)

from trompeloeil.

Is there something I should do here, or can I close the issue?

from trompeloeil.