Open hseeberger opened 7 years ago
That definitely reads more nicely, but we would have to seriously bend the rules to achieve this.
Currently one(m)
returns m
's type, so we can call .baz
on it, but in the example above the invocation of baz
is not on m
...
I don't like giving the mock as an argument to the verification methods, e.g.
one(m)
in the following snippet from the examples:Maybe something like the following reads more nicely?