Extended expect syntax and more #73

horkhe · 2012-07-31T05:21:06Z

With this patch I would like to suggest the following changes:

Previously sequences of return values could be defined through special sequence and loop functions. This patch introduces an alternative syntax that allows defining return specifications right in the expect function. Consider:

meck:expect(Mod, f, 1, meck:val(a)), % equivalent to meck:expect(Mod, f, 1, a)
?assertEqual(a, Mod:f(1001)),
?assertEqual(a, Mod:f(1001)),

meck:expect(Mod, f, 1, meck:seq([a, b])),
?assertEqual(a, Mod:f(1001)),
?assertEqual(b, Mod:f(1001)),
?assertEqual(b, Mod:f(1001)),

meck:expect(Mod, loop, 1, meck:loop([a, b])),
?assertEqual(a, Mod:loop(1001)),
?assertEqual(b, Mod:loop(1001)),
?assertEqual(a, Mod:loop(1001)),
Previously expectations can be defined either as func-name/arity or as func-name/anon-func. This patch introduces the third way which is defining an expectations through a list of arg pattern/values just like defining an ordiry function but shorter. Consider:

meck:expect(Mod, f, [{[1, 1], a},
{[1, ''], b},
{['', '_'], c}]),
?assertEqual(a, Mod:f(1, 1)),
?assertEqual(b, Mod:f(1, 2)),
?assertEqual(c, Mod:f(2, 2)).
Combining return specifications and argument patterns you can create quite sophisticated expectations. Consider:

meck:expect(Mod, f, [{[1, 1], meck:seq([a, b, c])},
{[1, ''], meck:loop([d, e])},
{['', '_'], meck:val(f)}]),
?assertEqual(d, Mod:f(1, 2)),
?assertEqual(f, Mod:f(2, 2)),
?assertEqual(e, Mod:f(1, 2)),
?assertEqual(a, Mod:f(1, 1)),
?assertEqual(d, Mod:f(1, 2)),
?assertEqual(b, Mod:f(1, 1)),
?assertEqual(c, Mod:f(1, 1)),
?assertEqual(f, Mod:f(2, 2)),
?assertEqual(c, Mod:f(1, 1)),
?assertEqual(e, Mod:f(1, 2)),
?assertEqual(c, Mod:f(1, 1)).
Besides internal data structure redesign made in the scope of this patch allows easier introduction of hamcrest patterns into the expectation definition.

Adam, please consider this changes and provide your comments.

horkhe · 2012-08-02T08:13:19Z

I did rebase and squashed changes to one commit for your convenience.

eproxus · 2012-08-03T17:53:32Z

I like this, a lot!

eproxus · 2012-08-05T16:05:21Z

src/meck.erl

+            {Answer, Expects}
+    catch
+        _:Error ->
+            throw({"Undefined expectation",


I think we should simulate a function_clause error instead of throwing our own custom exception here. Creating an expectation that only accepts [1001] as arguments should be considered to be faking a function equivalent to f(1001) -> ....

Internal data representatin needs to be changed to allow support for hamcrest argument matchers and argument dependent sequences and loops. Extend expect syntax to allow Arg patterns The syntax of expect function was extended to allow defining expectition through a list of Arg patterns like ['_', 1, blah] and define results as any of sequence, loop, or value. Fix merge mistake

Exports one per line; Corrected when clauses; Code kept to 80 chars per line; One liners formatted to one line.

Deprecate obsolete functions to encourage usage of the new API, that is expect/3,4 + seq/1,loop/1,/val/1.

Match specification compilation was moved to the calling process to be make matching more time efficient.

horkhe · 2012-08-06T11:55:54Z

@eproxus, I removed rebar.config and .gitignore changes from the original commit and that whipped out almost all your comments. Fortunately I managed to address all of them anyway. Please take a look.

horkhe · 2012-08-22T20:58:02Z

@eproxus have you had a chance to take a look at the changes?

eproxus · 2012-08-28T15:09:13Z

Sorry for the late reply. I'm planning to pull this in ASAP, I'll keep you posted.

horkhe · 2012-09-02T09:01:14Z

@eproxus just want to let you know that I've got another pull request coming that is based on this one. It will introduce 'honest' mocks that is mocks that allow you to create expectations for exported functions only. That will for example make your unit test fail if a module, mocked in your unit test, was updated to add a new parameter to a function that you have expectations for, hereby detecting the fact that you forgot to update your module and unit test earlier.

travisbot · 2012-09-03T17:53:34Z

This pull request passes (merged 12c2dea into beb8d14).

eproxus · 2012-09-03T18:51:17Z

src/meck.erl

+%% function. Values of `ret_spec' are constructed by {@link seq/1},
+%% {@link loop/1}, and {@link val/1} functions. They are used to specify
+%% return values in {@link expect/3} and {@link expect/4} functions.
+-type ret_spec() :: term().


You can use the opaque directive: -opaque my_opaq_type() :: Type. (see http://www.erlang.org/doc/reference_manual/typespec.html#id75447)

eproxus · 2012-09-03T19:46:06Z

Also, you've managed to make creation of expect functions faster. 👍

Before:

1> meck_performance_test:run(10000).
                Min     Max     Med     Avg
expect/3        1246    3435    1370    1409
expect/3+args   1939    7537    2253    2547
expect/4        2291    5497    2446    2474
expect/4+args   2797    6436    2950    3002

                Min     Max     Med     Avg
normal          8       682     9       10
normal_args     8       1652    9       10
shortcut        0       21      1       1
shortcut_args   0       36      1       1
shortcut_opaque 8       1545    9       11

                Min     Max     Med     Avg
called          19      135     20      21

After:

1> meck_performance_test:run(10000).
                Min     Max     Med     Avg
expect/3        1195    3732    1275    1289
expect/3+args   1825    5115    1980    2012
expect/4        2019    5271    2142    2187
expect/4+args   2385    6972    2539    2607

                Min     Max     Med     Avg
normal          9       648     10      10
normal_args     9       1591    10      11
shortcut        9       276     9       10
shortcut_args   9       304     10      10
shortcut_opaque 9       4777    10      12

                Min     Max     Med     Avg
called          19      75      20      22

Note however that the "shortcut" versions of the expects (e.g. meck:expect(M, F, 1, ok)) are slower (they were previously compiled into the mock module itself (there are a few lines of coverage missing around 689 and 710). It's not terribly important right now, and I also realized that with the ArgsPattern structure there will be even more opportunities for code generation.

travisbot · 2012-09-03T20:13:52Z

This pull request passes (merged 92b8ae3 into beb8d14).

horkhe · 2012-09-03T20:14:48Z

Glad to hear about the performance though it was not intentional. I addressed the most of your comments as good as I could manage at such late hour :)

travisbot · 2012-09-04T04:24:13Z

This pull request passes (merged fa0eb68 into beb8d14).

horkhe · 2012-09-04T04:24:36Z

Seems like this is it :)

travisbot · 2012-09-05T04:24:49Z

This pull request passes (merged de63a05a into beb8d14).

horkhe · 2012-09-07T09:22:36Z

@eproxus I do not want to sound pushy but is it possible to speed up code inspection a little? I have got 3 more pull requests coming.

Extended expect syntax and more

eproxus · 2012-09-10T19:26:39Z

Sorry for the incredibly long lag on my responses. I've now merged this into develop so we can let it brew for a while. Nice work! :-)

horkhe · 2012-09-10T19:47:15Z

Thanks! ...to be continued :-)

eproxus reviewed Aug 5, 2012
View reviewed changes

horkhe added 5 commits August 6, 2012 08:59

Address code inspection comments

58d5b9f

Exports one per line; Corrected when clauses; Code kept to 80 chars per line; One liners formatted to one line.

Deprecate sequence/4 and loop/4

454527e

Deprecate obsolete functions to encourage usage of the new API, that is expect/3,4 + seq/1,loop/1,/val/1.

Move match spec compilation to the caller

76a983f

Match specification compilation was moved to the calling process to be make matching more time efficient.

Raise function_clause in case of missing args pattern

ae8dcd6

Maxim Vladimirsky added 2 commits September 3, 2012 21:45

Make sequence/4 and loop/4 use the unified expect backend

df8eafe

Throw invalid_arity if multi-clause expectation is not valid

12c2dea

eproxus reviewed Sep 3, 2012
View reviewed changes

Address the second round of code inspection comments

92b8ae3

Add unit test covering invalid expect call

fa0eb68

eproxus added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2012

Merge pull request #73 from horkhe/feature/args-filter

4275a06

Extended expect syntax and more

eproxus merged commit 4275a06 into eproxus:develop Sep 10, 2012

eproxus added the enhancement label Jun 28, 2017

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Extended expect syntax and more #73

Extended expect syntax and more #73

horkhe commented Jul 31, 2012

horkhe commented Aug 2, 2012

eproxus commented Aug 3, 2012

eproxus Aug 5, 2012

horkhe commented Aug 6, 2012

horkhe commented Aug 22, 2012

eproxus commented Aug 28, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 2, 2012

travisbot commented Sep 3, 2012

eproxus Sep 3, 2012

eproxus commented Sep 3, 2012

travisbot commented Sep 3, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 3, 2012

travisbot commented Sep 4, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 4, 2012

travisbot commented Sep 5, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 7, 2012

eproxus commented Sep 10, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 10, 2012

Extended expect syntax and more #73

Extended expect syntax and more #73

Conversation

horkhe commented Jul 31, 2012

horkhe commented Aug 2, 2012

eproxus commented Aug 3, 2012

eproxus Aug 5, 2012

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

horkhe commented Aug 6, 2012

horkhe commented Aug 22, 2012

eproxus commented Aug 28, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 2, 2012

travisbot commented Sep 3, 2012

eproxus Sep 3, 2012

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eproxus commented Sep 3, 2012

travisbot commented Sep 3, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 3, 2012

travisbot commented Sep 4, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 4, 2012

travisbot commented Sep 5, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 7, 2012

eproxus commented Sep 10, 2012

horkhe commented Sep 10, 2012