Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>I think the missing piece of the puzzle is that you don't have to set an expectation on a method and instead you can just set a default return value.</p> <p><strong>Mocks</strong></p> <p>All the discussion and examples in the "<a href="http://code.google.com/p/googlemock/wiki/ForDummies">Google Mock for Dummies</a>" is focused around setting expectations. Everything talks about using some code similar to the following:</p> <pre><code>EXPECT_CALL(turtle, PenDown()) .Times(AtLeast(1)); </code></pre> <p>Which is what you want for mocking, but for stubbing you don't have any expectations. After reading that intro I had no clue how to use googlemock for stubbing.</p> <p><strong>Stubs</strong></p> <p>ratkok's comment led me to find out how to set a default return value. Here's how to specify a return value for a mocked object but no expectation:</p> <pre><code>ON_CALL(foo, Sign(_)) .WillByDefault(Return(-1)); </code></pre> <p><a href="http://code.google.com/p/googlemock/wiki/CookBook#Setting_the_Default_Actions_for_a_Mock_Method">http://code.google.com/p/googlemock/wiki/CookBook#Setting_the_Default_Actions_for_a_Mock_Method</a></p> <p>It appears googlemock will issue a warning if you call a method that has no EXPECT_CALL. Apparently you can prevent this warning by using their <a href="http://code.google.com/p/googlemock/wiki/CookBook#Nice_Mocks_and_Strict_Mocks">NiceMock</a> construct or you can just ignore it. Additionally it appears you can avoid the warning by using an expect instead (which I'm not sure if it's a good idea for stubs). From the <a href="http://code.google.com/p/googlemock/wiki/FrequentlyAskedQuestions#Google_Mock_prints_a_warning_when_a_function_without_EXPECT_CALL">Google Mock FAQ</a>:</p> <pre><code>EXPECT_CALL(foo, Bar(_)) .WillRepeatedly(...); </code></pre> <p>I believe that is exactly what I was trying to figure out.</p> <p><strong>Update</strong></p> <p>I can confirm this works. I wrote a unit test using google test along with googlemock and was able to stub out a method for a class using ON_CALL.</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POC++ Unit Testing: Stubs (not mocks)?
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. USUser
    1. USUser
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POC++ Unit Testing: Stubs (not mocks)?
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTAcceptedByOriginator
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. COYes, using ON_CALL() and NiceMock is exactly what I was referring too. Check those wiki pages (google mock) - this mocking framework is really quite powerful and flexible.
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. USratkok
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload