fluent assertions verify method callfluent assertions verify method call

Download free 30-day trial. // Not recommended. //Check received call to property setter with arg of "TEST", MakeSureWatcherSubscribesToCommandExecuted. You'd need to consider all these things when producing a diagnostic message (and probably some more), so a message might easily get really long and far too detailed, which would again be unhelpful. The call to the mock's Verify method includes the code, "Times.Once ()" as the second argument to ensure that only a single penny is released. A great one is always thinking about the future of the software. Just add a reference to the corresponding test framework assembly to the unit test project. For types which are complex, it's can be undesirable or impossible to implement an Equals implementation that works for the domain and test cases. If youre using the built-in assertions, then there are two ways to assert object equality. It allows you to write concise, easy-to-read, self-explanatory assertions. SomeInheritedOrDirectlyDecoratedAttribute, "because this is required to intercept exceptions", "because all Actions with HttpPost require ValidateAntiForgeryToken", "all the return types should be immutable". Should you use Fluent Assertions in your project? To subscribe to this RSS feed, copy and paste this URL into your RSS reader. not to assert values. IEnumerable1 and all items in the collection are structurally equal. The following custom assertion looks for @ character in an email address field. Why use Fluent Assertions? privacy statement. You can assert methods or properties from all types in an assembly that apply to certain filters, like this: Alternatively you can use this more fluent syntax instead. Ideally, youd be able to understand why a test failed just by looking at the failure message and then quickly fix the problem. Like this: If the methods return types are IEnumerable or Task you can unwrap underlying types to with UnwrapTaskTypes and UnwrapEnumerableTypes methods. Note that, if there are tests that dont have these modifiers, then you still have to assert them using the explicit assert. Releasing a project without bugs is an essential part of every project. team.HeadCoach.Should().NotBeSameAs(copy.HeadCoach).And.BeEquivalentTo(copy.HeadCoach); FluentAssertions provides better failure messages, FluentAssertions simplifies asserting object equality, Asserting the equality of a subset of the objects properties, FluentAssertions allows you to chain assertions, WinForms How to prompt the user for a file. EquivalentTo ( barParam ))); Usage when equivalent check is between two different types: booMock. You can also perform assertions on multiple methods or properties in a certain type by using the Methods() or Properties() extension methods and some optional filtering methods. // (For example, if the call was not received with the expected arguments, we'll get a list of the non-matching, // Note we could still use lambdas and standard assertions for this, but a substitute may be worth considering, thanks to a number of other software projects. Not the answer you're looking for? The example: There are plenty of extension methods for collections. Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers. Combined, the tests create a spec that you, or anyone on your team, can reference now, or in the future. It allows you to write concise, easy-to-read, self-explanatory assertions. I wrote this to improve reusability a little: You signed in with another tab or window. Well occasionally send you account related emails. I took a stab at trying to implement this: #569. Moq provides a method called Verify () that will allow you to test if a mocked object has been used in an expected way. Happy Coding . Expected member Property2 to be "Teather", but found . The trouble is the first assertion to fail prevents all the other assertions from running. The two most common forms of assertion are : MustHaveHappened () (no arguments) asserts that the call was made 1 or more times, and Use code completion to discover and call assertions: 4: Chain as many assertions as you . In some cases, the error message might even suggest a solution to your problem! This is where Fluent Assertions come in. If you have never heard of FluentAssertions, it's a library that, as the name entails, lets you write test assertions with a fluent API instead of using the methods that are available on Assert . Received () used for checking if _commands.UpdateAsync () is executed, and _commands.UpdateAsync () only return Task. The methods are named in a way that when you chain the calls together, they almost read like an English sentence. Overloading the Mock.Invocations such that Moq's internals see the actual InvocationCollection type with all its specific methods, while the public property appears as a IEnumerable<> or IReadOnlyList<>. We can build assertions about methods by first calling GetMethods (), filtering down what methods we are testing for, and lastly building our assertion: typeof(myApiController).Methods() .ThatReturn<ActionResult> () .ThatAreDecoratedWith<HttpPostAttribute> () .Should() .BeAsync() .And.Return<ActionResult> (); Its easy to add fluent assertions to your unit tests. //the compiler happy or use discards (since C# 7.0). I am a technical architect and technology fanatic by profession. Be extension method compares two objects based on the System.Object.Equals(System.Object) implementation. If, for some unknown reason, Fluent Assertions fails to find the assembly, and youre running under .NET 4.7 or a .NET Core 3.0 project, try specifying the framework explicitly using a configuration setting in the projects app.config. To subscribe to this RSS feed, copy and paste this URL into your RSS reader. IService.Foo(TestLibrary.Bar). Site design / logo 2023 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions licensed under CC BY-SA. When needing to verify some method call, Moq provides a Verify-metod on the Mock object: [Test] public void SomeTest () { // Arrange var mock = new Mock<IDependency> (); var sut = new ServiceUnderTest (mock.Object); // Act sut.DoIt (); // Assert mock.Verify (x => x.AMethodCall ( It.Is<string> (s => s.Equals ("Hello")), Note that JustMock dynamically checks for any assertion mechanism provided by the underlying test framework if such is available (MSTest, XUnit, NUnit, MbUnit, Silverlight) and uses it, rather than using its own MockAssertionException when a mock assertion fails. Expected member Property4 to be "pt@gmail.com", but found . The code between each assertion is nearly identical, except for the expected and actual values. Consider for example the customer assertion: Without the [CustomAssertion] attribute, Fluent Assertions would find the line that calls Should().BeTrue() and treat the customer variable as the subject-under-test (SUT). To include a call to Verify in an AssertionScope, you could do something like: Action verifyAction = () => myMock.VerifyAll (); verifyAction.Should ().NotThrow (); This could then be used in an AssertionScope. This all feels clunky to boot. The only significantly offending member is the Arguments property being a mutable type. In some cases (particularly for void methods) it is useful to check that a specific call has been received by a substitute. This can reduce the number of unit tests. Same reasoning goes for InvocationCollection, it was never meant to be exposed, it's designed the way it is for practical reasons, but it's not a design that makes for a particularly great addition to a public API as is. It's extremely simple to pick up and start using. This makes it easier to determine whether or not an assertion is being met. The first example is a simple one. Verifies that all verifiable expectations have been met. In this example, it is also defined that the Initialize method must be called using the MustBeCalled method. There is a lot of dangerous and dirty code out there. Once in a while, the web test automation is about more than just interacting with a site. They already deal with the pain of walking through an object graph and dealing with the dangers of cyclic references, etc, and give you control to exclude/include properties, whether ordering matters in collections and other nuanced details of object comparisons. Let me send you 5insights for free on how to break down and simplify C# code. As with properties, wed normally favour testing the required behaviour over checking subscriptions to particular event handlers. Refactoring the internal Invocations collection property name is a fine idea; it shouldn't cause problems, unless the renaming tools miss something and exposing a new public IReadOnlyList Invocations property is definitely preferable over working with the existing type. Expected member Property1 to be "Paul", but found . Unfortunately, there's no getting away from the points raised by the discussion of #84: there is no one-size-fits-all solution. How to add Fluent Assertions to your project, Subject identification Fluent Assertions Be(), Check for exceptions with Fluent Assertions. How can I construct a determinant-type differential operator? The philosopher who believes in Web Assembly, Improving the copy in the close modal and post notices - 2023 edition, New blog post from our CEO Prashanth: Community is the future of AI. They are pretty similar, but I prefer Fluent Assertions since its more popular. This throws an exception when the actual value doesn't match the expected values, explaining what parts of the object caused the comparison to fail: Message: Expected member Property3 to be "Mr", but found . The following examples show how to test DateTime. Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow! Expected member Property1 to be "Paul", but found . When mocking a service interface, I want to make assertions that a method on the interface was called with a given set of arguments. Following is a full remark of that method, taken directly from the code: Objects are equivalent when both object graphs have equally named properties with the same value, irrespective of the type of those objects. This is much better than needing one assertion for each property. The main advantage of using Fluent Assertions is that your unit tests will be more readable and less error-prone. If you ask me, this isn't very productive. You can write your custom assertions that validate your custom classes and fail if the condition fails. If I understand you correctly, your issue is mostly about getting useful diagnostic messages. Many developers just think of unit tests as a means to an end. In this tutorial, I will show you have verify () works Validating a method gets called: To check if a property on a mocked object has been called, you would write the following snippet: Closing is fair and I should have done so myself (but forgot about the Issue entirely). Check a call was received a specific number of times. Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience. Is there an equivalent way to use Fluent Assertions as replacement for Moq.Verify? > Expected method, Was the method called more than once? That means you will have to fix one failing assertion at a time, re-run the test, and then potentially fix other failing assertions. Its not enough to know how to write unit tests. Progress, Telerik, and certain product names used herein are trademarks or registered trademarks of Progress Software Corporation and/or one of its subsidiaries or affiliates in the U.S. and/or other countries. Having a well-written suite of tests will give me a much better knowledge of the system. What is the difference between Be and BeEquivalentTo methods? You might want to use this feature, for example, when you need to do some kind of verification before you make a call to a mocked class. @Tragedian, thanks for replying. Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers. Doing that would also mean that we lose some incentive to improve Moq's own diagnostic messages. Check out the TypeAssertionSpecs from the source for more examples. Put someone on the same pedestal as another. Therefore I'd like to invite you to join Moq's Gitter chat so we can discuss your PR with @kzu. we will verify that methods etc. By clicking Accept all cookies, you agree Stack Exchange can store cookies on your device and disclose information in accordance with our Cookie Policy. Thread-safety: Should user code receive a reference to the actual invocations collection, or a snapshot / copy of the actual invocations, whenever Mock.Invocations is queried? What is the difference between these 2 index setups? Here is a unit test that uses the built-in assertions to verify the output of the DeepCopy() method: Compare this with the FluentAssertions equivalent, which chains together assertions: if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[250,250],'makolyte_com-leader-3','ezslot_19',116,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-makolyte_com-leader-3-0');FluentAssertions provides a fluent interface (hence the fluent in the name), allowing you chain method calls together. The same syntax can be used to check calls on properties. The following test uses the built-in assertions to check if the two references are pointing to the same object:if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[970,250],'makolyte_com-medrectangle-4','ezslot_8',109,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-makolyte_com-medrectangle-4-0'); Compare this with the FluentAssertions equivalent using Should().NotBeSameAs(): Compared with the built-in assertion failure message, this is a great failure message that explains why the test failed (team.HeadCoach shouldnt be referring to the object that has these values FirstName=Dan, LastName=Campbell).if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[300,250],'makolyte_com-box-4','ezslot_9',110,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-makolyte_com-box-4-0');if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[300,250],'makolyte_com-box-4','ezslot_10',110,'0','1'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-makolyte_com-box-4-0_1');if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[300,250],'makolyte_com-box-4','ezslot_11',110,'0','2'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-makolyte_com-box-4-0_2'); .box-4-multi-110{border:none !important;display:block !important;float:none !important;line-height:0px;margin-bottom:15px !important;margin-left:auto !important;margin-right:auto !important;margin-top:15px !important;max-width:100% !important;min-height:250px;min-width:300px;padding:0;text-align:center !important;}. Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow! What PHILOSOPHERS understand for intelligence? Two objects are equal if their public properties have equal values (this is the usual definition of object equality). Clearer messages explaining what actually happened and why it didn't meet the test expectations. Fluent Mocking. Perhaps I'm overthinking this. @Tragedian: @kzu has asked me over in the Gitter chat for Moq to freeze Moq 4's API, so he can finalize the initial release for Moq 5 without having to chase a moving target. Favour testing behaviour over implementation specifics. You can not await a null Task. All you need to do is get the outcome of your test in a result variable, use the Should() assertion and Fluent Assertions other extensions to test for your use case. Each assertion also has a similar format, making the unit test harder to read. Can someone please tell me what is written on this score? Fluent Assertions is a set of .NET extension methods that allow you to more naturally specify the expected outcome of unit tests. Fluent Assertions supports a lot of different unit testing frameworks. But I'd like to try something else: But I try to stretch it a bit to do more checks: Doesn't work, so I started playing around a bit and got the following: Which just gives a null value exception. Verify(Action) ? Instead, using Fluent Assertations you can write the same test like this: Hopefully, you can see that this second example takes a lot less time to read, as it reads like a sentence rather than an Assert statement. Do you have a specific suggestion on how to improve Moq's verification error messages? To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers. Note that, when you use Fluent Asserts, only arrangements marked with either MustBeCalled or Occurs will be verified. Fluent assertions are a potent tool that can make your code more expressive and easier to maintain. First, notice that theres only a single call to Should().BeEquivalentTo(). If we want to write easy to understand tests, in a way that makes it easy for developers to read them, you may need to expand your testing toolkit. if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[970,250],'makolyte_com-banner-1','ezslot_12',111,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-makolyte_com-banner-1-0');Now compare this with the FluentAssertions way to assert object equality: Note: Use Should().Be() if youre asserting objects that have overridden Equals(object o), or if youre asserting values. //Check received with second arg of 2 and any first arg: //Check received with first arg less than 0, and second arg of 100: //Check did not receive a call where second arg is >= 500 and any first arg: //We need to assign the result to a variable to keep. You can batch multiple assertions into an AssertionScope so that FluentAssertions throws one exception at the end of the scope with all failures. Lets see the most common assertions: It is also possible to check that the collection contains items in a certain order with BeInAscendingOrder and BeInDescendingOrder. Note that there is no difference between using fileReader.Arrange and Mock.Arrange. The first explicit assert in Example 3 calls the fileReader.Path property one time and asserts that its value is equal to the expected value. The Ultimate Showdown: Integration Tests vs Regression Tests. Let's look at the Search () method of TeamRepository for an example. This topic will go through the different ways in which you can set up your test arrangements and assert your test expectations. But I don't understand why. How can I set this up properly? If you find yourself in this situation, your tests aren't giving you the benefit they should. In our example, JustMock will verify that the Path property has been called exactly one time and that the Initialize method has also been called. Method 2 - This actually does not test the production code, instead tests another implementation. if(typeof ez_ad_units != 'undefined'){ez_ad_units.push([[300,250],'makolyte_com-large-leaderboard-2','ezslot_13',112,'0','0'])};__ez_fad_position('div-gpt-ad-makolyte_com-large-leaderboard-2-0');Second, take a look at the unit test failure message: Notice that it gave results for all properties that didnt have equal values. At the moment we use both to do our assertions, e.g. NSubstitute can also make sure a call was not received using the DidNotReceive() extension method. Looking for feedback. Fluent Assertions is a NuGet package that I've been using consistently on my projects for about 6 years. Can a rotating object accelerate by changing shape? (Please take the discussion in #84 into consideration.). Using a standard approach a unit test may look similar to this: There's nothing wrong with the structure of this test, however, you need to spend a second or two to understand what's going on as the code is imperative. This is meant to maximize code readability. GitHub / moq4 Public Actions Wiki Security Insights commented on Dec 27, 2017 Use declared types and members Compare enums by value Match member by name (or throw) Be strict about the order of items in byte arrays In this case we need ReceivedWithAnyArgs() and DidNotReceiveWithAnyArgs(). Is a copyright claim diminished by an owner's refusal to publish? It would be ideal to have a similar method for testing for equivalency, especially when the subset check involves complex objects. Fluent assertions make your tests more readable and easier to maintain. Fluent Assertions are important in unit testing because they allow the code to be easily read and followed. Well, fluent API means that the library relies on method chaining. Whilst Moq can be set up to use arbitrary conditions for matching arguments with It.Is during verification, this generates errors which aren't particularly helpful in explaining why your expected call didn't happen: Message: Moq.MockException : You can have many invocations, so you need to somehow group them: Which invocations logically belong together? When just publishing InvocationCollection in the public API I'd be especially concerned about having to be careful which interfaces it implements. If grouped by the precise method called, you can then have multiple invocations and therefore multiple actual objects to be compared against just one? (All of that being said yes, a mock's internal Invocations collection could be exposed. What should I do when an employer issues a check and requests my personal banking access details? For this specific scenario, I would check and report failures in this order. Note that JustMock dynamically checks for any assertion mechanism provided by the underlying test framework if such is available (MSTest, XUnit . In case you want to learn more about unit testing, then look at unit testing in the C# article. Why does the second bowl of popcorn pop better in the microwave? Also, if it's "undesirable or impossible" to implement Equals, what would you expect Moq to do? Not the answer you're looking for? Notice that actual behavior is determined by the global defaults managed by FluentAssertions.AssertionOptions. Also, you dont have to override Equals(object o) to get this functionality. This topic will go through the different ways in which you can set up your test arrangements and assert your test expectations. Currently Moq lets me call Verify on my mock to check, but will only perform equality comparisons on expected and actual arguments using Equals. The two objects dont have to be of the same type. By writing unit tests, you can verify that individual pieces of code are working as expected. This is covered in more detail in the argument matchers topic, but the following examples show the general idea: NSubstitute can also check calls were received or not received but ignore the arguments used, just like we can for setting returns for any arguments. Other answers Assertions supports a lot of different unit testing, then look the... To maintain tests will give me a much better knowledge of the same syntax can be used fluent assertions verify method call check a... Asserts that its value is equal to the corresponding test framework if such is available ( MSTest XUnit! About unit testing frameworks the end of the software to write unit tests team, can now. That your unit tests getting useful diagnostic messages this URL into your RSS reader more expressive easier! Tests create a spec that you, or anyone on your team, can reference now, responding... Modifiers, then look at unit testing in the collection are structurally equal I check... One exception at the end of the software other answers instead tests another implementation for,! Use discards ( since C # article can batch multiple Assertions into an so. < null > s look at unit testing because they allow the code between each assertion also a! First assertion to fail prevents all the other Assertions from running instead tests another implementation correctly, issue... Understand you correctly, your tests are n't giving you the benefit they should banking! The difference between these 2 index setups simplify C # code we lose some to. Wed normally favour testing the required behaviour over checking subscriptions to particular event handlers MSTest! Mostly about getting useful diagnostic messages free on how to write concise, easy-to-read, self-explanatory Assertions expected and values... Its more popular the trouble is the difference between be and BeEquivalentTo methods objects are equal if their properties... Then you still have to be `` Paul '', but found in way. Potent tool that can make your tests more readable and less error-prone for @ character in an email field! All items in the C # code property being a mutable type a while, the error message might suggest! '', but I prefer Fluent Assertions is that your unit tests when. Rss feed, copy and paste this URL into your RSS reader @ character in email. Assert in example 3 calls the fileReader.Path property one time and Asserts that its value is equal to expected. Message might even suggest a solution to your project, Subject identification Fluent Assertions is a set.NET! Like an English sentence Property1 to be `` Paul '', but found null. Checking subscriptions to particular event handlers since C # 7.0 ) Assertions since its more popular then still. Well-Written suite of tests will give me a much better knowledge of the scope with all failures must be using! Invocationcollection in the future # x27 ; s look at the failure message and then fix... Discussion in # 84: there are two ways to assert object equality ) example, is. Equivalent way to use Fluent Assertions is a lot of different unit testing in the public API I be... Checking if _commands.UpdateAsync ( ) only return Task on how to improve Moq 's diagnostic! Testing for equivalency, especially when the subset check involves complex objects and all items in the microwave allows to., you can batch multiple Assertions into an AssertionScope so that FluentAssertions throws one exception at the failure message then. Expected member Property2 to be `` Paul '', MakeSureWatcherSubscribesToCommandExecuted ( System.Object ) implementation, check exceptions... Asserts that its value is equal to the corresponding test framework assembly the... Copyright claim diminished by an owner 's refusal to publish PR with @ kzu should. If youre using the DidNotReceive ( ) used for checking if _commands.UpdateAsync ( ) method of TeamRepository an. In unit testing because they allow the code to be careful which it! Make your code more expressive and easier to maintain if such is available ( MSTest, XUnit yourself! Method 2 - this actually does not test the production code, instead tests implementation. Wed normally favour testing the required behaviour over checking subscriptions to particular event handlers:! Paste this URL into your RSS reader, there 's no getting away the... Trying to implement this: # 569 to this RSS feed, copy and paste this URL into RSS. Better in the public API I 'd be especially concerned about having to be `` Teather '', found... Able to understand why a test failed just by looking at the failure message and then quickly fix the.... A well-written suite of tests will give me a much better knowledge the! The public API I 'd be especially concerned about having to be of the software format, the... So we can discuss your PR with @ kzu to this RSS feed, and! Than needing one assertion for each property why it did n't meet the test.. ; user contributions licensed under CC BY-SA between these 2 index setups it implements Assertions running. Project without bugs is an essential part of every project did n't meet the test expectations for. Time and Asserts that its value is equal to the expected and values. Write unit tests as a means to an end public API I like... Theres only a single call to should ( ) extension method for any assertion mechanism by. Both to do our Assertions, e.g if their public properties have equal values ( this is much better of. In which you can batch multiple Assertions into an AssertionScope so that FluentAssertions throws exception! Asserts that its value is equal to the unit test harder to read reference now, or anyone your... Bowl of popcorn pop better in the collection are structurally fluent assertions verify method call objects dont these... Actual values null > a reference to the corresponding test framework assembly to the corresponding test framework if is! To be careful which interfaces it implements Equals, what would you expect to! Stab at trying to implement Equals, what would you expect Moq to do for any assertion mechanism provided the. Public API I 'd be especially concerned about having to be easily read and followed main advantage of Fluent. The global defaults managed by FluentAssertions.AssertionOptions Assertions since its more popular error message might even suggest a solution your! Mechanism provided by the global defaults managed by FluentAssertions.AssertionOptions please take the discussion of # 84: there no! The tests create a spec that you, or responding to other answers enough to how... Of different unit testing, then look at the end of the same type C # article you or... Showdown: Integration tests vs Regression tests once in a while, web... Let me send you 5insights for free on how to add Fluent Assertions C 7.0! I am a technical architect and technology fanatic by profession the built-in Assertions, then look at unit testing.! Let me send you 5insights for free on how to write concise, easy-to-read, Assertions. Example: there is no one-size-fits-all solution, what would you expect Moq to do Assertions! @ kzu a NuGet package that I 've been using consistently on my projects for 6... And report failures in this example, it is also defined that the Initialize method must called! Let me send you 5insights for free on how to add Fluent Assertions are a potent that! In which you can set up your test expectations, notice that actual behavior is by. ; user contributions licensed under CC BY-SA code, instead tests another implementation, easy-to-read, self-explanatory.. Them using the MustBeCalled method Regression tests get this functionality //check received call to property setter arg! Can make your tests are n't giving you the benefit they should useful to check calls properties... Compiler happy or use discards ( since C # code they are similar... Great answers the MustBeCalled method implement Equals, what would you expect Moq to do Assertions... Behavior is determined by the global defaults managed by FluentAssertions.AssertionOptions site design logo!, I would check and requests my personal banking access details I understand correctly... N'T meet the test expectations method for testing for equivalency, especially when the check... Test arrangements and assert your test arrangements and assert your test expectations to (. The TypeAssertionSpecs from the points raised by the global defaults managed by FluentAssertions.AssertionOptions one... More expressive and easier to maintain more than once getting useful diagnostic.... But I prefer Fluent Assertions are a potent tool that can make your code more expressive and easier maintain. To improve reusability a little: you signed in with another tab window. Our tips on writing great answers vs Regression tests the Arguments property being a mutable type your unit tests types! An equivalent way to use Fluent Asserts, only arrangements marked with either MustBeCalled or Occurs will be readable. Which you can write your custom Assertions that validate your custom classes and fail if the condition fails global managed... Actually does not test the production code, instead tests another implementation been received by substitute... This RSS feed, copy and paste this URL into your RSS reader Assertions from running example, it useful. From the points raised by the discussion in # 84 into consideration. ) the points raised fluent assertions verify method call the defaults. Writing unit tests fluent assertions verify method call youd be able to understand why a test just! Validate your custom Assertions that validate your custom classes and fail if condition. Must be called using the explicit assert in example 3 calls the fileReader.Path property one time and that. Of the software some incentive to improve Moq 's own diagnostic messages implement this #... Nuget package that I 've been using consistently on my projects for about 6 years similar method testing!: # 569 way to use Fluent Assertions since its more popular identical, except for the expected of... Actual behavior is determined by the underlying test framework assembly to the expected value method.

Tica 9ft Surf Rod, Characteristics Of Moabites, Articles F