From b0568dcb4accfc5e3ae61862517983569414370d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Krystian Kuzniarek Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 08:39:40 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] fix a broken link ee3aa831172090fd5442820f215cb04ab6062756 added a broken link which results in 404. The broken part is reference to a nonexistent file "CheatSheet.md" instead of "cheet_sheet.md". --- googlemock/docs/cook_book.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md b/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md index 8f26a839..c47a6ad9 100644 --- a/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md +++ b/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ If a mock method has no `EXPECT_CALL` spec but is called, Google Mock will print a warning about the "uninteresting call". The rationale is: * New methods may be added to an interface after a test is written. We shouldn't fail a test just because a method it doesn't know about is called. - * However, this may also mean there's a bug in the test, so Google Mock shouldn't be silent either. (Note that the user should [*not* add an `EXPECT_CALL()`](https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googlemock/docs/CookBook.md#knowing-when-to-expect) to suppress the warning, even if they think the call is harmless). + * However, this may also mean there's a bug in the test, so Google Mock shouldn't be silent either. (Note that the user should [*not* add an `EXPECT_CALL()`](https://github.com/google/googletest/blob/master/googlemock/docs/cook_book.md#knowing-when-to-expect) to suppress the warning, even if they think the call is harmless). However, sometimes you may want to suppress all "uninteresting call" warnings, while sometimes you may want the opposite, i.e. to treat all