-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 812
SetupSequence: CallBase Support for Void methods #1096
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Agreed, it should be fairly straightforward.
From a user's perspective: The enhancement would appear to be useful. But since with
From a maintainer's perspective: I must confess that I do not like the For example, doing what I suggested above (adding As a maintainer, I'd much prefer if we didn't have to continue that neverending feature catch-up game. It's my (possibly unrealistic) hope that we'll one day be able to refactor Moq such that the same fluent API works on top of any type of setup (regular, sequential, protected) so we can get rid of all that code duplication. (That has actually happened for protected setups via |
A use case that does not require .Callback is to test retry logic on a void function so you could SetupSequence: |
Due to lack of recent activity, this issue has been labeled as 'stale'. |
Due to lack of recent activity, this issue has been labeled as 'stale'. |
This issue will now be closed since it has been labeled 'stale' without activity for 30 days. |
As an outsider looking in at the source, it would appear to me that it ought to be pretty easy to add
CallBase
support when setting up a Sequence on avoid
method.Relevant code:
Can you see any reasons why this isn't/shouldn't be supported?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: