Mocketry names again

Hi.

People start argue that my choice of names are not good.

For now Mocketry use "should got" to verify that following message was occurred:

mock should got someMessage

This is broken for native english speakers. Do you agree to replace it with correct #haveReceived? 

Can we use more short version #haveGot?

mock should haveReceived someMessage

mock should haveGot someMessage

Also there is new expression to verify how object was received during test: 

result should beReturnedFrom: [mock someMessage]

Should it be #haveReturnedFrom: ?

result should haveReturnedFrom: [mock someMessage]

I hope we can make consensus and be happy with Mocketry.

Best regards,

Denis

2016-04-20 13:59 GMT+02:00 Dennis Schetinin <[hidden email]>:

Why do we need those sophisticated past-something form after should at all? Why not simply

mock should receive someMessage

?

Maybe. What others think?

+1.

this is easy and simple for any native / non native english ..

Mocketry is really nice btw..

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 7:45 AM, Denis Kudriashov <[hidden email]> wrote:

2016-04-20 13:59 GMT+02:00 Dennis Schetinin <[hidden email]>:

Why do we need those sophisticated past-something form after should at all? Why not simply

mock should receive someMessage

?

Maybe. What others think?

2016-04-20 20:36 GMT+02:00 S Krish <[hidden email]>:

result should return: [mock someMessage]

It should verify that result was returned from message defined inside block. That's why I use  "should beReturnedFrom: [mock someMessage]". Following test demonstrates idea:

mock := Mock new.

mock stub someMessage willReturn: #result.

mock stub anotherMessage willReturn: #anotherResult.

mock someMessage should be: #result.

mock anotherMessage should be: #anotherResult.

#result should beReturnedFrom: [mock someMessage].

#result should not beReturnedFrom: [mock anotherMessage]

2016-04-27 0:33 GMT+02:00 Carlos Lombardi <[hidden email]>:

... maybe 

#result should beTheResultOf: [mock someMessage].

#result should not beTheResultOf: [mock anotherMessage].

It's nice.I think "The" can be omitted:

#result should beResultOf: [mock someMessage].

But anyway I use word #return because there are different types of result: value return and error signal. There is no expression for last case but it would be like:

anError should beRaisedBy: [mock someMessage]

Hi again,

ok, just to have coherence between the names for the two possible outcomes of a method, you could use #beReturnedBy instead of #beReturnedFrom: . You would have #beReturnedBy:  and  #beRaisedBy: 

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Denis Kudriashov <[hidden email]> wrote:

2016-04-27 0:33 GMT+02:00 Carlos Lombardi <[hidden email]>:

... maybe 

#result should beTheResultOf: [mock someMessage].

#result should not beTheResultOf: [mock anotherMessage].

It's nice.I think "The" can be omitted:

#result should beResultOf: [mock someMessage].

But anyway I use word #return because there are different types of result: value return and error signal. There is no expression for last case but it would be like:

anError should beRaisedBy: [mock someMessage]

So at the end of week I will rename "should got" into "should receive"

2016-04-27 23:39 GMT+02:00 Carlos Lombardi <[hidden email]>:

Hi again,

ok, just to have coherence between the names for the two possible outcomes of a method, you could use #beReturnedBy instead of #beReturnedFrom: . You would have #beReturnedBy:  and  #beRaisedBy: 

On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Denis Kudriashov <[hidden email]> wrote:

2016-04-27 0:33 GMT+02:00 Carlos Lombardi <[hidden email]>:

... maybe 

#result should beTheResultOf: [mock someMessage].

#result should not beTheResultOf: [mock anotherMessage].

It's nice.I think "The" can be omitted:

#result should beResultOf: [mock someMessage].

But anyway I use word #return because there are different types of result: value return and error signal. There is no expression for last case but it would be like:

anError should beRaisedBy: [mock someMessage]