Using expectations on more than one mock object at a time about trompeloeil

[rollbear]

It is not currently possible, no.

A possible work around is:

template <typename T>
auto needsUpdate(T&  t)
{
  return NAMED_REQUIRE_CALL(t, NeedAnyUpdates()).RETURN(true);
}

template <typename ... T>
auto theseNeedUpdates(T& ... t)
{
  std::vector<std::unique_ptr<trompeloeil::expectation>> rv;
  std::initializer_list<int>{(rv.push_back(needsUpdate(t)),0)...};
  return rv;
}

The initializer_list<int> thingie is an ugly work around for the lack of fold-expressions in C++14. It forces the calls to needsUpdate() for each t, and uses the comma operator to add a 0 to the initializer_list.

Then, in your test, you write:

  auto needsUpdates = theeseNeedsUpdates(m1, m2); // vector of expectations
  ... // things that may call NeedAnyUpdates()...

Is a smoother work solution very important for you? I do currently not have any idea how to implement it, so a smooth solution may take a while to get in place.

[rcdailey]

That feels very over-engineered. I didn't mean to imply that initializer lists were required. I'd be fine with something like this (if it makes it cleaner):

auto& um = CUpdateManager::Instance();

std::vector<MockUpdateReceiver> receivers(2);

um.AddReceiver(&receivers[0]);
um.AddReceiver(&receivers[1]);

REQUIRE_CALL(receivers, NeedAnyUpdates()).RETURN(true);
REQUIRE_CALL(receivers, Update(0.f));

um.Update(0.f);

And internally you can have special overloads for std::vector<T> and just run a loop that forwards to the version taking a single mock (T)

[rollbear]

I agree, but currently the presented work-around is the best I can offer. I'll try to figure out a better way.

[rcdailey]

I'll go ahead and close this one, it's a bit of an edge case and likely not going to be a good ROI. I haven't run into this too often myself, even.