Functionality Request. Verify Mock using the Mock Setup as base.

[tlogik]

Problem statement.

When doing setup of mocks and afterwards verifying you do a lot of repeated code, test code can become somewhat unnecessary bloated with text and it is harder to read.

When setting up a mock you describe your expectations to the setup.
Example:

var mockService = new Mock<ISomeService>();
mockService.Setup( x => x.DoStuff(It.IsAny<string>()).ReturnsAsync("Hello Moq");

mockService.Verify(x => x.DoStuff(It.IsAny<string>()), Times.Once);

I propose that what if the Verify could be done much simpler so i do not have to adjust if i change my parameters for the setup and keeping test code clean and concise.
Often they are exactly the same.

Example.

var mockService = new Mock<ISomeService>();
var doStuffMock = mockService.Setup( x => x.DoStuff(It.IsAny<string>()).ReturnsAsync("Hello Moq").Verifiable();

doStuffMock.Verify(Times.Once);

Since i do a lot of Mocks and usually you need to verify that the setup matches the verification, merging this into a convenience method that will allow us to:

• Limit the amount of code to write to do a mock verification
• Keep the test code lean
• Keep the test code lean and also clear.

[stakx]

@tlogik, IIRC, this can be done already:

var mockService = new Mock<ISomeService>();
mockService.Setup( x => x.DoStuff(It.IsAny<string>()).ReturnsAsync("Hello Moq").Verifiable();
var doStuff = mockService.Setups.Last();

doStuff.Verify();

Unfortunately, we cannot have Setup, ReturnsAsync, and Verifiable return the setup directly due to how the fluent API has been implemented; changing this might be a major breaking change, so for now you'll have to resort to fetching the setup using mock.Setups.Last() or similar.

(Notice: There's likely a small binary breaking change coming up sometime in the future that will affect the last line of code. This is in order to resolve #1093. The optional recursive parameter will be removed from that Verify method. The above source code would still compile even after that change, but binaries will have to be rebuilt.)

[stakx]

@tlogik, I am going to close this issue since it appears that what you requested can already be done. If I misunderstood something, let me know and we can reopen this issue.