Ayende @ Rahien

Ayende Rahien commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:12:53 GMT

It is an NUnit thingie. We had the same problem with Castle

Peter commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:12:12 GMT

FYI Just to let you know that I'm having problems with rhino mocks 3.6 and nunit 2.5.* I'm running nunit console using a project file containing 20 assemblies. All tests pass but it fails with the following: Unhandled Exception: System.AppDomainUnloadedException: Attempted to access an unloaded AppDomain. at System.AppDomain.get_FriendlyName() at NUnit.Util.DomainManager.DomainUnloader.Unload() at NUnit.Util.DomainManager.Unload(AppDomain domain) at NUnit.Util.TestDomain.Unload() at NUnit.ConsoleRunner.ConsoleUi.Execute(ConsoleOptions options) at NUnit.ConsoleRunner.Runner.Main(String[] args) I can get it to succeed if I take out some of the assemblies under test but never consistently the same assembly so it doesn't look like my code. All assemblies are targeting 3.5. If I revert back to nunit 2.4.7 everything works fine. It might be something to do with nunit but I thought I'd let you know.

Jiho Han commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 22:32:08 GMT

w.r.t. .net 2.0 support, I tried to download v3.5 for 2.0 but they still required System.Core.dll Like, Noam above, do I need to add reference to System.Core.dll in my 2.0 project?

Ayende Rahien commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 18:50:01 GMT

Kurt, That is actually expected, that should have never worked, you are mixing the two styles of working together

Kurt Harriger commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 17:34:48 GMT

FYI, I had a few dozen tests fail after upgrading to v 3.6 from code like this: var mocks = new MockRepository(); var something = mocks.Stub x.DoSomething() ).Return(true); something.DoSomething(); The root cause of the problem appears that mock.Stub/Mock/etc no longer returns the mock in replay mode. To fix replaced mock.Stub with MockRepository.GenerateStub. >

Ayende Rahien commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:36:30 GMT

It was the expected behavior from the users point of view.

Koen commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:33:18 GMT

Sounds like a test-breaking change. I'd say that would be ok for Stub but is too much change for Expect, but I'd also say to keep the behavior of both as similar as possible... Any specific reasons for this?

Ayende Rahien commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:01:58 GMT

Koen, Yes

Noam Gal commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:35:48 GMT

Something worth mentioning... In any case, I did manage to get it to run on my 2.0 project. Only had to add the above reference (I do have 3.5 installed). So far it worked, though I am not doing a whole lot of stuff with it yet, so maybe it'll fail on more complex scenarios. The recursive mocks are very nice indeed.

Ayende Rahien commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 10:18:38 GMT

Noam, 3.6 doesn't support 2.0 anymore

Noam Gal commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 06:30:28 GMT

I tried dropping in 3.6 over my 3.5 in a .NET 2.0 project. Apparently I now need system.core.dll 3.5 for the RhinoMocksExtensions calls. Is it a conscious decision to stop supporting 2.0, or am I missing something?

Nathan commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 20:37:02 GMT

Shane, +1 to hoping for a release one day that removes the record/replay syntax. It doesnt bother me, but I think its definitely an issue for getting new users on board

Shane Courtrille commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:42:48 GMT

I'd sell you on Rhino Mocks by saying it doesn't do a MyMock.Object to get at the actual object. From what I've heard that's the main complaint. I'd sell you on Moq by saying the API usage is MUCH cleaner. There aren't N ways to do one thing. I'm still hoping that at some point we see a Rhino Mocks release that removes backwards compatibility for everything not AAA.

Koen commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 12:31:31 GMT

I'm a little confused probably: "Dynamic mocks and stubs will now assume that a call is match by any number of expectation." Does this mean that from now on: myMock.Stub(...) == myMock.Stub(...).Repeat.Any() and: myMock.Expect(...) == myMock.Expect(...).Repeat.Any() ?

Ayende Rahien commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 11:44:31 GMT

cowgaR, I wouldn't, use whatever fits your needs

cowgaR commented on Rhino Mocks 3.6

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 11:40:04 GMT

as a Moq user how would you "sell" Rhino Mocks to me (no offense, just currious)? I somehow skipped RhinoMocks (wasn't tdd guy before) but it already went away with the record-replay, and the 2 frameworks seems identical...so can you be a good salesman and persuade me to use it? Rhino is your baby so I would like to have some comparison between the two. (I know google will spit something out but...) or you can be a diplomat and say "try it, you'll love it" :D