So the problem is as follows. I am unit testing a class SampleClass using Rhino Mocks 3.6. For the tests I use a mock of InnerClass as it is used in the SampleClass constructor. InnerClass has a method called TheMethod(ref string s1,ref string s2). Here is where the problem begins. TheMethod(ref string,ref string) is doing nothing with the parameters and I want TheMethod to actually modify one of the strings (s1). Is it possible, using Rhino Mocks, to do such thing? If so, then how? WhenCalled? Do() handler? I'm clueless. Here's the pseudocode
Class SampleClass
{
Public String SampleClassMethod()
{
string s1 = string.Empty;
string s2 = string.Empty;
string s_final = this.InnerClass.TheMethod(ref s1, ref s2); //TheMethod() which is doing
//nothing with the given strings
if (s_final == "something")
return s1;
}
}
The result is, that s1 is unchanged and for the testing reasons I would like the TestMethod() to modify s1's value WITHOUT changing the body of TheMethod() itself
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1()
{
//generating mocks
//SampleClass target; //tested class object
Expect.Call(InnerClassMock.TheMethod(
ref Arg<string>.Ref(Rhino.Mocks.Constraints.Is.Equal(s1), string1).Dummy,
ref Arg<string>.Ref(Rhino.Mocks.Constraints.Is.Equal(s1), string1).Dummy)).IgnoreArguments();
string temp = target.SampleClassMethod();
Assert.AreEqual("1234", temp);
}
Assuming your inner class looks something like this (Note that TheMethod is virtual):
public class SomeClass
{
public virtual string TheMethod(ref string s1, ref string s2)
{
s1 = "X";
s2 = "Y";
return "Z";
}
}
You can use Rhino.Mock's "OutRef" option to define output for ref arguments:
var mock = MockRepository.GenerateStub<SomeClass>();
string temp1 = "", temp2 = "";
mock.Stub(m => m.TheMethod(ref temp1, ref temp2)).OutRef("AAA", "BBB").Return("DEF");
var my1 = "";
var my2 = "";
var result = mock.TheMethod(ref my1, ref my2);
After running this code, my1 will be "AAA", my2 will be "BBB" and result will be "DEF".
Related
This might be a duplicate. But I cannot find a solution to my Problem.
I have a class
public class MyResponse implements Serializable {
private boolean isSuccess;
public boolean isSuccess() {
return isSuccess;
}
public void setSuccess(boolean isSuccess) {
this.isSuccess = isSuccess;
}
}
Getters and setters are generated by Eclipse.
In another class, I set the value to true, and write it as a JSON string.
System.out.println(new ObjectMapper().writeValueAsString(myResponse));
In JSON, the key is coming as {"success": true}.
I want the key as isSuccess itself. Is Jackson using the setter method while serializing? How do I make the key the field name itself?
This is a slightly late answer, but may be useful for anyone else coming to this page.
A simple solution to changing the name that Jackson will use for when serializing to JSON is to use the #JsonProperty annotation, so your example would become:
public class MyResponse implements Serializable {
private boolean isSuccess;
#JsonProperty(value="isSuccess")
public boolean isSuccess() {
return isSuccess;
}
public void setSuccess(boolean isSuccess) {
this.isSuccess = isSuccess;
}
}
This would then be serialised to JSON as {"isSuccess":true}, but has the advantage of not having to modify your getter method name.
Note that in this case you could also write the annotation as #JsonProperty("isSuccess") as it only has the single value element
I recently ran into this issue and this is what I found. Jackson will inspect any class that you pass to it for getters and setters, and use those methods for serialization and deserialization. What follows "get", "is" and "set" in those methods will be used as the key for the JSON field ("isValid" for getIsValid and setIsValid).
public class JacksonExample {
private boolean isValid = false;
public boolean getIsValid() {
return isValid;
}
public void setIsValid(boolean isValid) {
this.isValid = isValid;
}
}
Similarly "isSuccess" will become "success", unless renamed to "isIsSuccess" or "getIsSuccess"
Read more here: http://www.citrine.io/blog/2015/5/20/jackson-json-processor
Using both annotations below, forces the output JSON to include is_xxx:
#get:JsonProperty("is_something")
#param:JsonProperty("is_something")
When you are using Kotlin and data classes:
data class Dto(
#get:JsonProperty("isSuccess") val isSuccess: Boolean
)
You might need to add #param:JsonProperty("isSuccess") if you are going to deserialize JSON as well.
EDIT: If you are using swagger-annotations to generate documentation, the property will be marked as readOnly when using #get:JsonProperty. In order to solve this, you can do:
#JsonAutoDetect(isGetterVisibility = JsonAutoDetect.Visibility.NONE)
data class Dto(
#field:JsonProperty(value = "isSuccess") val isSuccess: Boolean
)
You can configure your ObjectMapper as follows:
mapper.setPropertyNamingStrategy(new PropertyNamingStrategy() {
#Override
public String nameForGetterMethod(MapperConfig<?> config, AnnotatedMethod method, String defaultName)
{
if(method.hasReturnType() && (method.getRawReturnType() == Boolean.class || method.getRawReturnType() == boolean.class)
&& method.getName().startsWith("is")) {
return method.getName();
}
return super.nameForGetterMethod(config, method, defaultName);
}
});
I didn't want to mess with some custom naming strategies, nor re-creating some accessors.
The less code, the happier I am.
This did the trick for us :
import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonIgnoreProperties;
import com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.JsonProperty;
#JsonIgnoreProperties({"success", "deleted"}) // <- Prevents serialization duplicates
public class MyResponse {
private String id;
private #JsonProperty("isSuccess") boolean isSuccess; // <- Forces field name
private #JsonProperty("isDeleted") boolean isDeleted;
}
Building upon Utkarsh's answer..
Getter names minus get/is is used as the JSON name.
public class Example{
private String radcliffe;
public getHarryPotter(){
return radcliffe;
}
}
is stored as { "harryPotter" : "whateverYouGaveHere" }
For Deserialization, Jackson checks against both the setter and the field name.
For the Json String { "word1" : "example" }, both the below are valid.
public class Example{
private String word1;
public setword2( String pqr){
this.word1 = pqr;
}
}
public class Example2{
private String word2;
public setWord1(String pqr){
this.word2 = pqr ;
}
}
A more interesting question is which order Jackson considers for deserialization. If i try to deserialize { "word1" : "myName" } with
public class Example3{
private String word1;
private String word2;
public setWord1( String parameter){
this.word2 = parameter ;
}
}
I did not test the above case, but it would be interesting to see the values of word1 & word2 ...
Note: I used drastically different names to emphasize which fields are required to be same.
You can change primitive boolean to java.lang.Boolean (+ use #JsonPropery)
#JsonProperty("isA")
private Boolean isA = false;
public Boolean getA() {
return this.isA;
}
public void setA(Boolean a) {
this.isA = a;
}
Worked excellent for me.
If you are interested in handling 3rd party classes not under your control (like #edmundpie mentioned in a comment) then you add Mixin classes to your ObjectMapper where the property/field names should match the ones from your 3rd party class:
public class MyStack32270422 {
public static void main(String[] args) {
ObjectMapper om3rdParty = new ObjectMapper();
om3rdParty .addMixIn(My3rdPartyResponse.class, MixinMyResponse.class);
// add further mixins if required
String jsonString = om3rdParty.writeValueAsString(new My3rdPartyResponse());
System.out.println(jsonString);
}
}
class MixinMyResponse {
// add all jackson annotations here you want to be used when handling My3rdPartyResponse classes
#JsonProperty("isSuccess")
private boolean isSuccess;
}
class My3rdPartyResponse{
private boolean isSuccess = true;
// getter and setter here if desired
}
Basically you add all your Jackson annotations to your Mixin classes as if you would own the class. In my opinion quite a nice solution as you don't have to mess around with checking method names starting with "is.." and so on.
there is another method for this problem.
just define a new sub-class extends PropertyNamingStrategy and pass it to ObjectMapper instance.
here is a code snippet may be help more:
mapper.setPropertyNamingStrategy(new PropertyNamingStrategy() {
#Override
public String nameForGetterMethod(MapperConfig<?> config, AnnotatedMethod method, String defaultName) {
String input = defaultName;
if(method.getName().startsWith("is")){
input = method.getName();
}
//copy from LowerCaseWithUnderscoresStrategy
if (input == null) return input; // garbage in, garbage out
int length = input.length();
StringBuilder result = new StringBuilder(length * 2);
int resultLength = 0;
boolean wasPrevTranslated = false;
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++)
{
char c = input.charAt(i);
if (i > 0 || c != '_') // skip first starting underscore
{
if (Character.isUpperCase(c))
{
if (!wasPrevTranslated && resultLength > 0 && result.charAt(resultLength - 1) != '_')
{
result.append('_');
resultLength++;
}
c = Character.toLowerCase(c);
wasPrevTranslated = true;
}
else
{
wasPrevTranslated = false;
}
result.append(c);
resultLength++;
}
}
return resultLength > 0 ? result.toString() : input;
}
});
The accepted answer won't work for my case.
In my case, the class is not owned by me. The problematic class comes from 3rd party dependencies, so I can't just add #JsonProperty annotation in it.
To solve it, inspired by #burak answer above, I created a custom PropertyNamingStrategy as follow:
mapper.setPropertyNamingStrategy(new PropertyNamingStrategy() {
#Override
public String nameForSetterMethod(MapperConfig<?> config, AnnotatedMethod method, String defaultName)
{
if (method.getParameterCount() == 1 &&
(method.getRawParameterType(0) == Boolean.class || method.getRawParameterType(0) == boolean.class) &&
method.getName().startsWith("set")) {
Class<?> containingClass = method.getDeclaringClass();
String potentialFieldName = "is" + method.getName().substring(3);
try {
containingClass.getDeclaredField(potentialFieldName);
return potentialFieldName;
} catch (NoSuchFieldException e) {
// do nothing and fall through
}
}
return super.nameForSetterMethod(config, method, defaultName);
}
#Override
public String nameForGetterMethod(MapperConfig<?> config, AnnotatedMethod method, String defaultName)
{
if(method.hasReturnType() && (method.getRawReturnType() == Boolean.class || method.getRawReturnType() == boolean.class)
&& method.getName().startsWith("is")) {
Class<?> containingClass = method.getDeclaringClass();
String potentialFieldName = method.getName();
try {
containingClass.getDeclaredField(potentialFieldName);
return potentialFieldName;
} catch (NoSuchFieldException e) {
// do nothing and fall through
}
}
return super.nameForGetterMethod(config, method, defaultName);
}
});
Basically what this does is, before serializing and deserializing, it checks in the target/source class which property name is present in the class, whether it is isEnabled or enabled property.
Based on that, the mapper will serialize and deserialize to the property name that is exist.
I'm trying to serialize an object (Root), with some duplicated entries of MyObject. Just want store the whole objects one, I'm using #JsonIdentityReference, which works pretty well.
However, I realize that it will generate un-deserializable object, if there're equal objects with different reference. I wonder if there's a configuration in Jackson to change this behavior, thanks!
#Value
#AllArgsConstructor
#NoArgsConstructor(force = true)
class Root {
private List<MyObject> allObjects;
private Map<String, MyObject> objectMap;
}
#Value
#AllArgsConstructor
#NoArgsConstructor(force = true)
#JsonIdentityReference
#JsonIdentityInfo(generator = ObjectIdGenerators.PropertyGenerator.class, property = "id")
class MyObject {
private String id;
private int value;
}
public class Main {
public static void main() throws JsonProcessingException {
// Constructing equal objects
val obj1 = new MyObject("a", 1);
val obj2 = new MyObject("a", 1);
assert obj1.equals(obj2);
val root = new Root(
Lists.newArrayList(obj1),
ImmutableMap.of(
"lorem", obj2
)
);
val objectMapper = new ObjectMapper();
val json = objectMapper.writeValueAsString(root);
// {"allObjects":[{"id":"a","value":1}],"objectMap":{"lorem":{"id":"a","value":1}}}
// Note here both obj1 and obj2 are expanded.
// Exception: Already had POJO for id
val deserialized = objectMapper.readValue(json, Root.class);
assert root.equals(deserialized);
}
}
I'm using Jackson 2.10.
Full stacktrace:
Exception in thread "main" com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonMappingException: Already had POJO for id (java.lang.String) [[ObjectId: key=a, type=com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.impl.PropertyBasedObjectIdGenerator, scope=java.lang.Object]] (through reference chain: Root["objectMap"]->java.util.LinkedHashMap["lorem"]->MyObject["id"])
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonMappingException.wrapWithPath(JsonMappingException.java:394)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.JsonMappingException.wrapWithPath(JsonMappingException.java:353)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.BeanDeserializerBase.wrapAndThrow(BeanDeserializerBase.java:1714)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.BeanDeserializer.deserializeFromObject(BeanDeserializer.java:371)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.BeanDeserializerBase.deserializeWithObjectId(BeanDeserializerBase.java:1257)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.BeanDeserializer.deserialize(BeanDeserializer.java:157)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.std.MapDeserializer._readAndBindStringKeyMap(MapDeserializer.java:527)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.std.MapDeserializer.deserialize(MapDeserializer.java:364)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.std.MapDeserializer.deserialize(MapDeserializer.java:29)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.impl.FieldProperty.deserializeAndSet(FieldProperty.java:138)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.BeanDeserializer.vanillaDeserialize(BeanDeserializer.java:288)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.BeanDeserializer.deserialize(BeanDeserializer.java:151)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper._readMapAndClose(ObjectMapper.java:4202)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper.readValue(ObjectMapper.java:3205)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.ObjectMapper.readValue(ObjectMapper.java:3173)
at Main.main(Main.java:53)
Caused by: java.lang.IllegalStateException: Already had POJO for id (java.lang.String) [[ObjectId: key=a, type=com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.impl.PropertyBasedObjectIdGenerator, scope=java.lang.Object]]
at com.fasterxml.jackson.annotation.SimpleObjectIdResolver.bindItem(SimpleObjectIdResolver.java:24)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.impl.ReadableObjectId.bindItem(ReadableObjectId.java:57)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.impl.ObjectIdValueProperty.deserializeSetAndReturn(ObjectIdValueProperty.java:101)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.impl.ObjectIdValueProperty.deserializeAndSet(ObjectIdValueProperty.java:83)
at com.fasterxml.jackson.databind.deser.BeanDeserializer.deserializeFromObject(BeanDeserializer.java:369)
... 14 more
As I mentioned earlier, this setup only works if obj1 == obj2, as the two objects with same ID should be identity-equal. In that case, the second object would also net get expanded during serialization (alwaysAsId = false only expands the first object).
However, if you want to have this setup and are fine with the serialization, you could use a custom Resolver for deserialization that stores a single instance per key:
#JsonIdentityReference(alwaysAsId = false)
#JsonIdentityInfo(generator = ObjectIdGenerators.PropertyGenerator.class, property = "id", resolver = CustomScopeResolver.class)
static class MyObject {
private String id;
// ...
}
class CustomScopeResolver implements ObjectIdResolver {
Map<String, MyObject> data = new HashMap<>();
#Override
public void bindItem(final IdKey id, final Object pojo) {
data.put(id.key.toString(), (MyObject) pojo);
}
#Override
public Object resolveId(final IdKey id) {
return data.get(id.key);
}
#Override
public ObjectIdResolver newForDeserialization(final Object context) {
return new CustomScopeResolver();
}
#Override
public boolean canUseFor(final ObjectIdResolver resolverType) {
return false;
}
}
NEW EDIT: Apparently, its very easy: Just turn on objectMapper.configure(SerializationFeature.USE_EQUALITY_FOR_OBJECT_ID, true); so that the DefaultSerializerProvider uses a regular Hashmap instead of an IdentityHashMap to manage the serialized beans.
DEPRECATED: Update for Serialization: It is possible to achieve this by adding a custom SerializationProvider:
class CustomEqualObjectsSerializerProvider extends DefaultSerializerProvider {
private final Collection<MyObject> data = new HashSet<>();
private final SerializerProvider src;
private final SerializationConfig config;
private final SerializerFactory f;
public CustomEqualObjectsSerializerProvider(
final SerializerProvider src,
final SerializationConfig config,
final SerializerFactory f) {
super(src, config, f);
this.src = src;
this.config = config;
this.f = f;
}
#Override
public DefaultSerializerProvider createInstance(final SerializationConfig config, final SerializerFactory jsf) {
return new CustomEqualObjectsSerializerProvider(src, this.config, f);
}
#Override
public WritableObjectId findObjectId(final Object forPojo, final ObjectIdGenerator<?> generatorType) {
// check if there is an equivalent pojo, use it if exists
final Optional<MyObject> equivalentObject = data.stream()
.filter(forPojo::equals)
.findFirst();
if (equivalentObject.isPresent()) {
return super.findObjectId(equivalentObject.get(), generatorType);
} else {
if (forPojo instanceof MyObject) {
data.add((MyObject) forPojo);
}
return super.findObjectId(forPojo, generatorType);
}
}
}
#Test
public void main() throws IOException {
// Constructing equal objects
final MyObject obj1 = new MyObject();
obj1.setId("a");
final MyObject obj2 = new MyObject();
obj2.setId("a");
assert obj1.equals(obj2);
final Root root = new Root();
root.setAllObjects(Collections.singletonList(obj1));
root.setObjectMap(Collections.singletonMap(
"lorem", obj2));
final ObjectMapper objectMapper = new ObjectMapper();
objectMapper.setSerializerProvider(
new CustomEqualObjectsSerializerProvider(
objectMapper.getSerializerProvider(),
objectMapper.getSerializationConfig(),
objectMapper.getSerializerFactory()));
final String json = objectMapper.writeValueAsString(root);
System.out.println(json); // second object is not expanded!
}
http://localhost:8080/users?firstName=a&lastName=b ---> where firstName=a and lastName=b
How to make it to or ---> where firstName=a or lastName=b
But when I set QuerydslBinderCustomizer customize
#Override
default public void customize(QuerydslBindings bindings, QUser user) {
bindings.bind(String.class).all((StringPath path, Collection<? extends String> values) -> {
BooleanBuilder predicate = new BooleanBuilder();
values.forEach( value -> predicate.or(path.containsIgnoreCase(value) );
});
}
http://localhost:8080/users?firstName=a&firstName=b&lastName=b ---> where (firstName=a or firstName = b) and lastName=b
It seem different parameters with AND. Same parameters with what I set(predicate.or/predicate.and)
How to make it different parameters with AND like this ---> where firstName=a or firstName=b or lastName=b ??
thx.
Your current request param are grouped as List firstName and String lastName. I see that you want to keep your request parameters without a binding, but in this case it would make your life easier.
My suggestion is to make a new class with request param:
public class UserRequest {
private String lastName;
private List<String> firstName;
// getters and setters
}
For QueryDSL, you can create a builder object:
public class UserPredicateBuilder{
private List<BooleanExpression> expressions = new ArrayList<>();
public UserPredicateBuilder withFirstName(List<String> firstNameList){
QUser user = QUser.user;
expressions.add(user.firstName.in(firstNameList));
return this;
}
//.. same for other fields
public BooleanExpression build(){
if(expressions.isEmpty()){
return Expressions.asBoolean(true).isTrue();
}
BooleanExpression result = expressions.get(0);
for (int i = 1; i < expressions.size(); i++) {
result = result.and(expressions.get(i));
}
return result;
}
}
And after you can just use the builder as :
public List<User> getUsers(UserRequest userRequest){
BooleanExpression expression = new UserPredicateBuilder()
.withFirstName(userRequest.getFirstName())
// other fields
.build();
return userRepository.findAll(expression).getContent();
}
This is the recommended solution.
If you really want to keep the current params without a binding (they still need some kind of validation, otherwise it can throw an Exception in query dsl binding)
you can group them by path :
Map<StringPath,List<String>> values // example firstName => a,b
and after that to create your boolean expression based on the map:
//initial value
BooleanExpression result = Expressions.asBoolean(true).isTrue();
for (Map.Entry entry: values.entrySet()) {
result = result.and(entry.getKey().in(entry.getValues());
}
return userRepository.findAll(result);
i have a problem and want to know if it is or if it will be possible with json.net
i have a superclass called A and two classes which inherit from it, B1 and B2
when i made a list of type A and then add some B1 and B2, after serialize and deserialize they are all of type A.
Is it possible that each class which inherit will be casted to its former class type like B1 or B2?
Yes, it should work as long as you inform JSON.Net that you want to use TypeNameHandling.All and use appropriate casting. The following works in my project:
public class MembaseJsonSerializer<T>
{
private IContractResolver resolver;
public MembaseJsonSerializer(IContractResolver resolver)
{
this.resolver = resolver;
}
public R FromJson<R>(object json)
{
if (typeof(T).IsAssignableFrom(typeof(R)))
{
object res = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject(json.ToString(), new JsonSerializerSettings() {
ContractResolver = resolver,
TypeNameHandling = TypeNameHandling.All
});
return (R)res;
}
throw new NotImplementedException("Type is not assignable.");
}
public string ToJson(object obj)
{
if (typeof(T).IsAssignableFrom(obj.GetType()))
{
string json = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(obj, Formatting.None, new JsonSerializerSettings() {
ContractResolver = resolver,
TypeNameHandling = TypeNameHandling.All
});
return json;
}
throw new NotImplementedException("Type is not assignable.");
}
}
Where T is the base class and R is the sub class.
My following straight forward test doesn't pass (Though I feel it should). Either I am missing something or is not clear of Property.value constraint. please help me in understanding concept of property.value constraint.
public interface ISomeInterface
{
void SomeMethod(string x, string y);
}
public class SomeClassTest
{
[Test]
public void SomeMethodTest()
{
MockRepository mocks = new MockRepository();
ISomeInterface mockservice = mocks.StrictMock<ISomeInterface>();
using (mocks.Record())
{
mockservice.SomeMethod("xValue", "yValue");
LastCall.Constraints(Property.Value("x", "xValue"),
Property.Value("y", "yValue"));
}
mockservice.SomeMethod("xValue", "yValue");
mocks.Verify(mockservice);
}
}
Exception raised:
Rhino.Mocks.Exceptions.ExpectationViolationException : ISomeInterface.SomeMethod("xValue", "yValue"); Expected #0, Actual #1.
ISomeInterface.SomeMethod(property 'x' equal to xValue, property 'y' equal to yValue); Expected #1, Actual #0.
I would recommend you the following syntax (AAA syntax):
// arrange
var mockservice = MockRepository.GenerateMock<ISomeInterface>();
// act
mockservice.SomeMethod("xValue", "yValue");
// assert
mockservice.AssertWasCalled(
x => x.SomeMethod("xValue", "yValue")
);
This sample class illustrates the options for asserting methods were called with appropriate properties:
public class UsesThing
{
private IMyThing _thing;
public UsesThing(IMyThing thing)
{
_thing = thing;
}
public void DoTheThing(int myparm)
{
_thing.DoWork(myparm, Helper.GetParmString(myparm));
}
public void DoAnotherThing(int myparm)
{
AnotherThing thing2 = new AnotherThing();
thing2.MyProperty = myparm + 2;
_thing.DoMoreWork(thing2)
}
}
Using simple values for assertions may work for methods like the DoTheThing method which uses value types:
[Test]
public void TestDoTheThing()
{
IMyThing thing = MockRepository.GenerateMock<IMyThing>();
UsesThing user = new UsesThing(thing);
user.DoTheThing(1);
thing.AssertWasCalled(t => t.DoWork(1, "one");
}
However, if you need to create an object in your method and pass it as a parameter like in the DoAnotherThing method, this approach will not work since you will not have a reference to the object. You have to check the property values of the unknown object, like this:
[Test]
public void TestDoAnotherThing()
{
IMyThing thing = MockRepository.GenerateMock<IMyThing>();
UsesThing user = new UsesThing(thing);
user.DoAnotherThing(1);
thing.AssertWasCalled(t => t.DoMoreWork(null), t => t.IgnoreArguments().Constraints(Property.Value("MyProperty", 3))));
}
The new Rhino syntax would look like the following, but I am crashing VS 2008 when I use it:
thing.AssertWasCalled(t => t.DoMoreWork(Arg<AnotherThing>.Matches(Property.Value("MyProperty", 3))));