How to make mockery detect typos in foo.On("MyMethox")?

[guettli]

In my setup v2.35.3 mockery does not complain, if I have a type like foo.On("MyMethox").

Or if I don't provide an argument to a method which requires an argument.

If the method of the interface requires a string, and I just use foo.On("MethodWhichWantsAString"), then this gets silently ignored.

This can waste precious time.

Is there a way to make mockery complain typos and missing arguments? about that?

[LandonTClipp]

Yes, usage of the .EXPECT() builder pattern. This returns a struct with methods that are (mostly) identical to your interface. So one of its methods would be, in your example, .MethodWhichWantsAString("foobar"). This will automatically call out the appropriate expectation in testify. This method is a bit more type safe as if you can't misspell the method name, and if you miss an argument, you'll get compiler errors.

It's not 100% fool proof because the argument types in the method are interface{} because we need a way to specify mock.Anything. A way to get around that is something like mock.EXPECT().MethodWhichWantsAString(mock.Anything).RunAndReturn(func(s string){ return "foo" }). This is the most type-safe way to specify expectations.

[guettli]

Thank you for the hint. I the code base I work only only .On() gets used, so I was not aware of .EXPECT().

I should have read the docs:

We recommend always interacting with the assertions through .EXPECT() as mockery auto-generates methods that call out to Mock.On() themselves, providing you with some amount of compile-time safety. Consider