Trouble setting default ON_CALL Return value for const string & method: error: size of array is negative

[doug livesey]

Hi -- I'm trying to stub the value of a const string & method, but it fails to compile with the following error:

  In file included from gmock/include/gmock/gmock.h:58:0,

                   from test/include/mocks/mocks.h:3,

                   from test/persistence/creator_test.cpp:1:

  gmock/include/gmock/gmock-actions.h: In instantiation of 'testing::internal::ReturnAction<R>::operator testing::Action<Func>() const [with F = const std::basic_string<char>&(); R = std::basic_string<char>]':

  test/persistence/creator_test.cpp:158:80:   required from here

  gmock/include/gmock/gmock-actions.h:469:5: error: size of array is negative

  gmock/include/gmock/gmock-actions.h: In instantiation of 'class testing::internal::ReturnAction<std::basic_string<char> >::Impl<const std::basic_string<char>&()>':

  gmock/include/gmock/gmock-actions.h:472:41:   required from 'testing::internal::ReturnAction<R>::operator testing::Action<Func>() const [with F = const std::basic_string<char>&(); R = std::basic_string<char>]'

  test/persistence/creator_test.cpp:158:80:   required from here

  gmock/include/gmock/gmock-actions.h:496:5: error: size of array is negative

  rake aborted!

  Command failed with status (1): [g++-mp-4.7 -c -Igmock/include -Igmock/gtes...]

I've cobbled together a file containing the code that's generating it as best I can -- the offending bit seems to be the call to WillByDefault() on line 74 (in my cobbled-together example file) -- if I comment that bit out (keeping the ON_CALL bit), it compiles just fine.

The file is here: https://gist.github.com/3673595

If anyone could help me, here, I'd be very grateful -- I'm obviously missing something pretty fundamental, but I've no idea what it is & have been chasing myself in futile circles with it for ages.

Thanks,

   Doug.

[doug livesey]

Sorry! I *promise* I spent ages on this before posting, but on re-reading (for the nth time) the docs, I came across mention of a little function called ReturnRef, and that has solved my problem.

Cheers,

   Doug.

[Patricio Astudillo]

Thank-you-so-freakin-much!! For updating your post!

Op zaterdag 8 september 2012 13:29:08 UTC+2 schreef doug livesey: