[5.2] Remove unnecessary code

[phroggyy]

This just removes some unneeded code from #13724, and fixes an alignment issue in use statements ¯_(ツ)_/¯

[vlakoff]

Sorry I don't have time to review the code, but how come the shouldReceive were noneffective?

[phroggyy]

@vlakoff: they were used while I was working on #13724, but then as one test was removed, I didn't need the mocking any longer, but forgot to get rid of em.

[vlakoff]

Yup, but the shouldReceive mocks weren't called? Weren't they supposed to throw error if not called?

I'm sure you know your code, I'm just surprised that shouldReceive inconsistencies weren't throwing errors. I was trusting them so much.

[phroggyy]

They were, but the test was removed (because unit testing the functionality
was stupid), so then they weren't.
On Fri, 27 May 2016 at 00:48, vlakoff notifications@github.com wrote:

Yup, but the shouldReceive mocks weren't called? Weren't they supposed to
throw error if not called?

I'm sure you know your code, I'm just surprised these shouldReceive
inconsistencies weren't throwing errors. I was trusting them so much.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#13732 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AG65g2Zt_P0I0gB4atSZ7l_7y_7J9XwCks5qFiNBgaJpZM4In8_f
.

[vlakoff]

Thanks for your prompt replies. And these uncalled shouldReceive didn't throw errors... I should have a look at this, for educational purposes :)

[phroggyy]

Ah, that's what you mean. shouldReceive($x) never ensures a call is made.
It just declares if this class receives $x, respond with...
On Fri, 27 May 2016 at 00:58, vlakoff notifications@github.com wrote:

Thanks for your prompt replies. And these uncalled shouldReceive didn't
throw errors... I should have a look at this, for educational purposes :)

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#13732 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AG65g1aQSMzEtjQkA-NXGkXB2kvFfx4-ks5qFiV7gaJpZM4In8_f
.

[vlakoff]

Mmm, hence the ->never(). That's a bit misleading, isn't it? I'm sure I made this mistake before. Thanks for clarifying.