This provides a type-safe way for an action to express that it wants to be
called only once, or to capture move-only objects. It is a generalization of
the type system-evading hack in ByMove, with the improvement that it works for
_any_ action (including user-defined ones), and correctly expresses that the
action can only be used with WillOnce. I'll make existing actions benefit in a
future commit.
PiperOrigin-RevId: 440496139
Change-Id: I4145d191cca5655995ef41360bb126c123cb41d3
A few tests are examining code locations and looking af the resulting line
numbers to verify that GoogleTest shows those to users correctly. Some of those
locations change when clang-format is run. For those locations, I've wrapped
portions in:
// clang-format off
...
// clang-format on
There may be other locations that are currently not tickled by running
clang-format.
PiperOrigin-RevId: 434844712
Change-Id: I3a9f0a6f39eff741c576b6de389bef9b1d11139d
Give each of Naggy/Nice/StrictMock a base class whose constructor runs before
the mocked class's constructor, and a destructor that runs after the mocked
class's destructor, so that any mock methods run in either the constructor or
destructor use the same strictness as other calls.
PiperOrigin-RevId: 348511612
gmock-spec-builders.h:503:3: error:
definition of implicit copy constructor for 'Expectation' is deprecated
because it has a user-declared destructor [-Werror,-Wdeprecated]
~Expectation();
^
None of these are strictly needed for correctness.
A large number of them (maybe all of them?) trigger `-Wdeprecated`
warnings on Clang trunk as soon as you try to use the implicitly
defaulted (but deprecated) copy constructor of a class that has
deleted its copy assignment operator.
By declaring a deleted copy assignment operator, the old code
also caused the move constructor and move assignment operator
to be non-declared. This means that the old code never got move
semantics -- "move-construction" would simply call the defaulted
(but deprecated) copy constructor instead. With the new code,
"move-construction" calls the defaulted move constructor, which
I believe is what we want to happen. So this is a runtime
performance optimization.
Unfortunately we can't yet physically remove the definitions
of these macros from gtest-port.h, because they are being used
by other code internally at Google (according to zhangxy988).
But no new uses should be added going forward.
gmock-spec-builders.h uses std::function (in MockFunction) but did
not include <functional> to provide it. Apparently, it worked since
the header must have been included by something else but better be
safe than sorry.
Fix mocking method arguments with templated copy constructors.
A previous change removed workarounds for old compilers from googletest and googlemock. Unfortunately, a bit of code that started as a workaround for Symbian's C++ compiler is still needed to avoid copy/move constructor ambiguity when mocking functions with certain argument types.
The test case added by this CL is extracted from Chrome's codebase, and was discovered while attempting to roll googletest.
PiperOrigin-RevId: 229801765
Now that googletest has moved to C++11, it should no longer
use NULL or 0 for the null pointer. This patch converts all
such usages to nullptr using clang-tidy.
This prevents LLVM from issuing -Wzero-as-null-pointer-constant
warnings.
PiperOrigin-RevId: 215814400
Internal CL 156157936, which was published in commit
fe402c27790ff1cc9a7e17c5d0aea4ebe7fd8a71, introduced undefined behavior
by casting a base class (internal::{Naggy,Nice,Strict}Base<MockClass>,
using the curiously recurring template pattern) pointer to a derived
class ({Naggy,Nice,Strict}Mock<MockClass>), in the base class'
constructor. At that point, the object isn't guaranteed to have taken on
the shape of the derived class, and casting is undefined behavior.
The undefined behavior was caught by Chrome's CFI build bot [1], and
prevents rolling googletest past that commit / CL.
This commit simplifies the {Naggy,Nice,Strict}Mock class hierarchy in
a way that removes the undefined behavior.
[1] https://www.chromium.org/developers/testing/control-flow-integrity
