Merge pull request #1567 from gennadiycivil/master

merging

googlemock/include/gmock/gmock-generated-nice-strict.h

@@ -80,6 +80,11 @@ class NiceMock : public MockClass {
   }
 
 #if GTEST_LANG_CXX11
+  // Ideally, we would inherit base class's constructors through a using
+  // declaration, which would preserve their visibility. However, many existing
+  // tests rely on the fact that current implementation reexports protected
+  // constructors as public. These tests would need to be cleaned up first.
+
   // Single argument constructor is special-cased so that it can be
   // made explicit.
   template <typename A>
@@ -193,6 +198,11 @@ class NaggyMock : public MockClass {
   }
 
 #if GTEST_LANG_CXX11
+  // Ideally, we would inherit base class's constructors through a using
+  // declaration, which would preserve their visibility. However, many existing
+  // tests rely on the fact that current implementation reexports protected
+  // constructors as public. These tests would need to be cleaned up first.
+
   // Single argument constructor is special-cased so that it can be
   // made explicit.
   template <typename A>
@@ -306,6 +316,11 @@ class StrictMock : public MockClass {
   }
 
 #if GTEST_LANG_CXX11
+  // Ideally, we would inherit base class's constructors through a using
+  // declaration, which would preserve their visibility. However, many existing
+  // tests rely on the fact that current implementation reexports protected
+  // constructors as public. These tests would need to be cleaned up first.
+
   // Single argument constructor is special-cased so that it can be
   // made explicit.
   template <typename A>

googlemock/include/gmock/gmock-generated-nice-strict.h.pump

@@ -92,6 +92,11 @@ class $clazz : public MockClass {
   }
 
 #if GTEST_LANG_CXX11
+  // Ideally, we would inherit base class's constructors through a using
+  // declaration, which would preserve their visibility. However, many existing
+  // tests rely on the fact that current implementation reexports protected
+  // constructors as public. These tests would need to be cleaned up first.
+
   // Single argument constructor is special-cased so that it can be
   // made explicit.
   template <typename A>

googlemock/test/gmock-nice-strict_test.cc

@@ -32,9 +32,10 @@
 #include "gmock/gmock-generated-nice-strict.h"
 
 #include <string>
+#include <utility>
 #include "gmock/gmock.h"
-#include "gtest/gtest.h"
 #include "gtest/gtest-spi.h"
+#include "gtest/gtest.h"
 
 // This must not be defined inside the ::testing namespace, or it will
 // clash with ::testing::Mock.
@@ -114,6 +115,24 @@ class MockBar {
   GTEST_DISALLOW_COPY_AND_ASSIGN_(MockBar);
 };
 
+#if GTEST_GTEST_LANG_CXX11
+
+class MockBaz {
+ public:
+  class MoveOnly {
+    MoveOnly() = default;
+
+    MoveOnly(const MoveOnly&) = delete;
+    operator=(const MoveOnly&) = delete;
+
+    MoveOnly(MoveOnly&&) = default;
+    operator=(MoveOnly&&) = default;
+  };
+
+  MockBaz(MoveOnly) {}
+}
+#endif  // GTEST_GTEST_LANG_CXX11 && GTEST_HAS_STD_MOVE_
+
 #if GTEST_HAS_STREAM_REDIRECTION
 
 // Tests that a raw mock generates warnings for uninteresting calls.
@@ -214,8 +233,9 @@ TEST(NiceMockTest, AllowsExpectedCall) {
   nice_foo.DoThis();
 }
 
-// Tests that an unexpected call on a nice mock which returns a not-default-constructible
-// type throws an exception and the exception contains the method's name.
+// Tests that an unexpected call on a nice mock which returns a
+// not-default-constructible type throws an exception and the exception contains
+// the method's name.
 TEST(NiceMockTest, ThrowsExceptionForUnknownReturnTypes) {
   NiceMock<MockFoo> nice_foo;
 #if GTEST_HAS_EXCEPTIONS
@@ -266,6 +286,14 @@ TEST(NiceMockTest, AllowLeak) {
   leaked->DoThis();
 }
 
+#if GTEST_GTEST_LANG_CXX11 && GTEST_HAS_STD_MOVE_
+
+TEST(NiceMockTest, MoveOnlyConstructor) {
+  NiceMock<MockBaz> nice_baz(MockBaz::MoveOnly());
+}
+
+#endif  // GTEST_LANG_CXX11 && GTEST_HAS_STD_MOVE_
+
 #if !GTEST_OS_SYMBIAN && !GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE
 // Tests that NiceMock<Mock> compiles where Mock is a user-defined
 // class (as opposed to ::testing::Mock).  We had to work around an
@@ -366,6 +394,14 @@ TEST(NaggyMockTest, AllowLeak) {
   leaked->DoThis();
 }
 
+#if GTEST_GTEST_LANG_CXX11 && GTEST_HAS_STD_MOVE_
+
+TEST(NaggyMockTest, MoveOnlyConstructor) {
+  NaggyMock<MockBaz> naggy_baz(MockBaz::MoveOnly());
+}
+
+#endif  // GTEST_LANG_CXX11 && GTEST_HAS_STD_MOVE_
+
 #if !GTEST_OS_SYMBIAN && !GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE
 // Tests that NaggyMock<Mock> compiles where Mock is a user-defined
 // class (as opposed to ::testing::Mock).  We had to work around an
@@ -447,6 +483,14 @@ TEST(StrictMockTest, AllowLeak) {
   leaked->DoThis();
 }
 
+#if GTEST_GTEST_LANG_CXX11 && GTEST_HAS_STD_MOVE_
+
+TEST(StrictMockTest, MoveOnlyConstructor) {
+  StrictMock<MockBaz> strict_baz(MockBaz::MoveOnly());
+}
+
+#endif  // GTEST_LANG_CXX11 && GTEST_HAS_STD_MOVE_
+
 #if !GTEST_OS_SYMBIAN && !GTEST_OS_WINDOWS_MOBILE
 // Tests that StrictMock<Mock> compiles where Mock is a user-defined
 // class (as opposed to ::testing::Mock).  We had to work around an