mock object methods
Description
In MXUnit the return value of a mocked object (as returned by mock()) can be replaced as follows:
This does not work in TestBox's compat and makes it cumbersome to switch from MXUnit to TestBox.
Reference the first example, here: https://github.com/mxunit/mxunit/wiki/Defining-a-Mock's-Behaviour
See also TESTBOX-54. The ticket is closed (but not resolved) and has a note about calling mock without arguments, which is valid in MXUnit but not TestBox's compat.
Activity
Okay, thanks for the response, . I completely understanding dropping support for MXUnit. But that said, it would be helpful to have some sort of a migration guide for those of us coming over (or trying to, at least!) from MXUnit.
I'll also point out that the above code is not really a viable migration route because of the "path" argument, but maybe createStub would work.
Thanks . I will update this guide: https://testbox.ortusbooks.com/in-depth/mxunit-compatibility
With some of your feedback.
Also, yes, `createMock()` is a typed a approach. If you don't care about types, then use `createStub()`.
Let me also add , that we will be glad to help you migrate away from MXUnit. Are you in our box team slack?
It might not be that we update the core for certain things, but we will be glad to help in any way we can.
I'm not sure of the box team is the box-products channel in cfml.slack.com, but, if so, then yes, I'm in there. I've been in the chat as Sna4x8 since the IRC days! =)
You can join our official support slack here: http://boxteam.herokuapp.com/
The entire Ortus team is behind this team, so responses are better and more granular for any of our products.
