Welcome to Typemock Answers. Here you can ask and receive answers from other community members. And if you liked or disliked an answer or thread: react with an up- or downvote Enjoy!

:oops:

0 votes
Sorry Richard is a little late over here and didn't read your previous post well. Everything is ok now .But i m suprise your library is the most complete of all mock libraries i found up to now (hope that virtual mock feature to work and i m going to have time for going out from now on), why that limitation i mean with the batch file. Anyway my congratulations !!!.

Ah i forgot im on mbUnit .Do u have any better suggestion?
asked Jan 23, 2005 by tolisss (3,660 points)

1 Answer

0 votes
Sorry Richard is a little late over here and didn't read your previous post well. Everything is ok now .

Well, I am happy to be able solve your problem. :D

But i m suprise your library is the most complete of all mock libraries i found up to now (hope that virtual mock feature to work and i m going to have time for going out from now on), why that limitation i mean with the batch file. Anyway my congratulations !!!.

The limitation with the batch file, is actually a limitation with the .NET CLR. We will eliminate this need for Visual Studio add ins, in our next release. And we are looking for ways to eliminate this completely in future releases.

Thanks for supporting our library, we are doing all we can to help ease .NET developers write unit tests.

Ah i forgot im on mbUnit .Do u have any better suggestion?

Not really, TypeMock.NET supports all testing frameworks, I was just exploring other possiblities that might cause problems.
answered Jan 23, 2005 by richard (3,900 points)
...