Implicit new #80

Closed
eproxus opened this Issue Oct 23, 2012 · 3 comments

Projects

None yet

3 participants

@eproxus
Owner
eproxus commented Oct 23, 2012

This means get rid of the {not_mocked, Module} error and just run new if there is no Meck process already.

@horkhe
Contributor
horkhe commented Oct 23, 2012

Certainly doable, but don't we trying to be too smart with that? As a user I would prefer my unit test to fail in this case. Has a need for that came from your personal experience or somebody asked for that?

@eproxus
Owner
eproxus commented Oct 23, 2012

It's just something that I thought about, that you would save tons of meck:new(mod) lines for test cases that don't need mocks with options.

@edgurgel
Contributor

@eproxus, that would mean:

meck:expect(module, ...).

I would not need to write meck:new if I used expect on a module?

Cool

@aaron-thompson aaron-thompson added a commit to aaron-thompson/meck that referenced this issue Aug 16, 2013
@horkhe @aaron-thompson horkhe + aaron-thompson Implement 'implicit new' feature #80 914ec68
@eproxus eproxus closed this Mar 31, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment