@@ -697,9 +697,9 @@ TEST(AbcTest, Xyz) {
697697 EXPECT_CALL(foo, DoThat(_, _));
698698
699699 int n = 0;
700- EXPECT_EQ('+', foo.DoThis(5)); // FakeFoo::DoThis() is invoked.
700+ EXPECT_EQ(foo.DoThis(5), '+' ); // FakeFoo::DoThis() is invoked.
701701 foo.DoThat("Hi", &n); // FakeFoo::DoThat() is invoked.
702- EXPECT_EQ(2, n );
702+ EXPECT_EQ(n, 2 );
703703}
704704```
705705
@@ -1129,11 +1129,11 @@ using STL's `<functional>` header is just painful). For example, here's a
11291129predicate that's satisfied by any number that is >= 0, <= 100, and != 50:
11301130
11311131```cpp
1132- using testing::AllOf;
1133- using testing::Ge;
1134- using testing::Le;
1135- using testing::Matches;
1136- using testing::Ne;
1132+ using :: testing::AllOf;
1133+ using :: testing::Ge;
1134+ using :: testing::Le;
1135+ using :: testing::Matches;
1136+ using :: testing::Ne;
11371137...
11381138Matches(AllOf(Ge(0), Le(100), Ne(50)))
11391139```
@@ -1861,7 +1861,7 @@ error. So, what shall you do?
18611861Though you may be tempted, DO NOT use `std::ref()`:
18621862
18631863```cpp
1864- using testing::Return;
1864+ using :: testing::Return;
18651865
18661866class MockFoo : public Foo {
18671867 public:
@@ -1873,7 +1873,7 @@ class MockFoo : public Foo {
18731873 EXPECT_CALL(foo, GetValue())
18741874 .WillRepeatedly(Return(std::ref(x))); // Wrong!
18751875 x = 42;
1876- EXPECT_EQ(42, foo.GetValue());
1876+ EXPECT_EQ(foo.GetValue(), 42 );
18771877```
18781878
18791879Unfortunately, it doesn't work here. The above code will fail with error:
@@ -1895,14 +1895,14 @@ the expectation is set, and `Return(std::ref(x))` will always return 0.
18951895returns the value pointed to by `pointer` at the time the action is *executed*:
18961896
18971897```cpp
1898- using testing::ReturnPointee;
1898+ using :: testing::ReturnPointee;
18991899...
19001900 int x = 0;
19011901 MockFoo foo;
19021902 EXPECT_CALL(foo, GetValue())
19031903 .WillRepeatedly(ReturnPointee(&x)); // Note the & here.
19041904 x = 42;
1905- EXPECT_EQ(42, foo.GetValue()); // This will succeed now.
1905+ EXPECT_EQ(foo.GetValue(), 42 ); // This will succeed now.
19061906```
19071907
19081908### Combining Actions
@@ -2264,7 +2264,7 @@ TEST_F(FooTest, Test) {
22642264
22652265 EXPECT_CALL(foo, DoThis(2))
22662266 .WillOnce(Invoke(NewPermanentCallback(SignOfSum, 5)));
2267- EXPECT_EQ('+', foo.DoThis(2)); // Invokes SignOfSum(5, 2).
2267+ EXPECT_EQ(foo.DoThis(2), '+' ); // Invokes SignOfSum(5, 2).
22682268}
22692269```
22702270
@@ -2771,11 +2771,13 @@ returns a null `unique_ptr`, that’s what you’ll get if you don’t specify a
27712771action:
27722772
27732773```cpp
2774+ using ::testing::IsNull;
2775+ ...
27742776 // Use the default action.
27752777 EXPECT_CALL(mock_buzzer_, MakeBuzz("hello"));
27762778
27772779 // Triggers the previous EXPECT_CALL.
2778- EXPECT_EQ(nullptr, mock_buzzer_.MakeBuzz("hello"));
2780+ EXPECT_THAT( mock_buzzer_.MakeBuzz("hello"), IsNull( ));
27792781```
27802782
27812783If you are not happy with the default action, you can tweak it as usual; see
@@ -3194,9 +3196,9 @@ flag. For example, given the test program:
31943196```cpp
31953197#include "gmock/gmock.h"
31963198
3197- using testing::_;
3198- using testing::HasSubstr;
3199- using testing::Return;
3199+ using :: testing::_;
3200+ using :: testing::HasSubstr;
3201+ using :: testing::Return;
32003202
32013203class MockFoo {
32023204 public:
@@ -3817,15 +3819,15 @@ If the built-in actions don't work for you, you can easily define your own one.
38173819All you need is a call operator with a signature compatible with the mocked
38183820function. So you can use a lambda:
38193821
3820- ```
3822+ ```cpp
38213823MockFunction<int(int)> mock;
38223824EXPECT_CALL(mock, Call).WillOnce([](const int input) { return input * 7; });
3823- EXPECT_EQ(14, mock.AsStdFunction()(2));
3825+ EXPECT_EQ(mock.AsStdFunction()(2), 14 );
38243826```
38253827
38263828Or a struct with a call operator (even a templated one):
38273829
3828- ```
3830+ ```cpp
38293831struct MultiplyBy {
38303832 template <typename T>
38313833 T operator()(T arg) { return arg * multiplier; }
@@ -3840,16 +3842,16 @@ struct MultiplyBy {
38403842It's also fine for the callable to take no arguments, ignoring the arguments
38413843supplied to the mock function:
38423844
3843- ```
3845+ ```cpp
38443846MockFunction<int(int)> mock;
38453847EXPECT_CALL(mock, Call).WillOnce([] { return 17; });
3846- EXPECT_EQ(17, mock.AsStdFunction()(0));
3848+ EXPECT_EQ(mock.AsStdFunction()(0), 17 );
38473849```
38483850
38493851When used with `WillOnce`, the callable can assume it will be called at most
38503852once and is allowed to be a move-only type:
38513853
3852- ```
3854+ ```cpp
38533855// An action that contains move-only types and has an &&-qualified operator,
38543856// demanding in the type system that it be called at most once. This can be
38553857// used with WillOnce, but the compiler will reject it if handed to
0 commit comments