Trying to make it more clear: this is probably not about mock classes, but about mocked classes

PiperOrigin-RevId: 439427291
Change-Id: I3cac035e732fb3fe4f9c314657932a55269e0416
pull/3791/head
Abseil Team 2 years ago committed by Copybara-Service
parent 137f67e91f
commit c9044ba3dd
  1. 12
      docs/gmock_for_dummies.md

@ -190,12 +190,12 @@ Some people put it in a `_test.cc`. This is fine when the interface being mocked
`Foo` changes it, your test could break. (You can't really expect `Foo`'s
maintainer to fix every test that uses `Foo`, can you?)
Generally, you should not define mock classes you don't own. If you must mock
such a class owned by others, define the mock class in `Foo`'s Bazel package
(usually the same directory or a `testing` sub-directory), and put it in a `.h`
and a `cc_library` with `testonly=True`. Then everyone can reference them from
their tests. If `Foo` ever changes, there is only one copy of `MockFoo` to
change, and only tests that depend on the changed methods need to be fixed.
Generally, you should not mock classes you don't own. If you must mock such a
class owned by others, define the mock class in `Foo`'s Bazel package (usually
the same directory or a `testing` sub-directory), and put it in a `.h` and a
`cc_library` with `testonly=True`. Then everyone can reference them from their
tests. If `Foo` ever changes, there is only one copy of `MockFoo` to change, and
only tests that depend on the changed methods need to be fixed.
Another way to do it: you can introduce a thin layer `FooAdaptor` on top of
`Foo` and code to this new interface. Since you own `FooAdaptor`, you can absorb

Loading…
Cancel
Save