Added support for lambda expressions while creating a mock

[frblondin]

Implements #884.

The following methods have been added:

Mock<T>.ctor(Expression<Func<T>> constructorExpression, MockBehavior behavior = MockBehavior.Strict)
MockRepository.Create<T>(Expression<Func<T>> constructorExpression, MockBehavior behavior = MockBehavior.Strict)

Ideally, the parameter order will be based on that of existing constructors / methods.

As per your remark in the issue, I favored the use of an optional parameter for the behavior. Using an optional parameter doesn't allow us to keep the same order because the behavior is necessary the last parameter (the one being optional...).

The implementation works as follows:

• The lambda expression is being analyzed using a new visitor
• I wanted these new methods to successfully get the argument values whatever they use (captured local variables, method calls, constructors, new array inits...). Once the NewExpression is visited, an internal lambda will be created & invoked to produce the arguments as an instance of object[]

I was about to suggest to mark the existing mock creation method/constructors (taking params object[]) as deprecated... but in any case we still need them when creating a mock of an abstract class!

I added unit tests & updated the changelog.

[stakx]

Looks good overall! I'd like to give this another, closer look, unfortunately I'm running out of time today. In the meantime, could you please take care of the following few details?

Thank you!

[stakx]

Please insert a blank line above this line, so that imports are grouped by the main namespace (System.*, Moq.*).

[frblondin]

Looks all good to me. Let me know!

[stakx]

Sorry for the wait, @frblondin.

I've got a few more things, I've been paying some more attention to fitting this new feature into the existing codebase in a consistent manner... so there's some nitpicking involved. I hope you don't mind.

[frblondin]

I integrated most your changes: except the new overloads to avoid use of optional parameters (creates ambiguities) and your question about use of lambda syntax for parameter-less constructors.

Hope this version will be the good one ;-)

[stakx]

Nearly there. :-)

(Sorry for the nitpicking, it's easier to get these things done right now while we're focusing on it, rather than later.)

except the new overloads to avoid use of optional parameters (creates ambiguities)

Ah, right you are! Agreed, let's keep the optional parameters. 👍

[frblondin]

New round of updates, I believe your remaining change requests have been taken into account - you to confirm & resolve!

Thanks for you time.

[stakx]

Thank you!

There is another whitespace issue in Resources.resx (a succession of redundant blank lines) but I've caused you as much work there as I dare 😆, so if you don't mind I'll clean this up myself quickly after merging.

🚀