Replace Moq

[martincostello]

Given recent developments with Moq as of version 4.20.0, we should remove it and replace with another library.

NSubstitue seems like a good substitue.

I'm going to work on this today unless someone has any strong opinions about an alternative library to use in its place.

[martintmk]

Are there any plans to fork the Moq?
Maybe in the meantime, we can freeze the versions and wait for some "official forked package".

I have not used NSubstitute personally, so I can't comment on that. It seems some folks find it cleaner compared to Moq.

If the switch is straightforward, we can get away with that.

[adamnova]

There is already an issue for creating a migration tool: nsubstitute/NSubstitute#720

I would probably wait and see in this case, how it develops. The latest version of Moq no longer has that dependency, so I would say it's not immediate concern.

[martincostello]

Thanks for the link, I'll bear that in mind for the future. I have however just finished locally converting the code over 😅

[adamnova]

I am looking at the PR and to be honest, I like the syntax more than Moq. Never used NSubstitute before.

[lucasgarciadev22]

Hello, I'm worried about this situation, we use Moq in my company and I'm willing to replace it ASAP. Is NSubistitute safe and easy to migrate from Moq?

Thanks !

[martincostello]

This specific code base maybe took me about an hour, others have taken 15 minutes, others still I stopped and reverted the changes and I'll tackle them another time.

From my experiences today, it seems to mostly be a function of how much you use functionality like Verify() in Moq. The more you use that, the more work a migration is.

In the simplest cases, it's just a matter of a change like this:

- var thing = Mock.Of<Thing>();
+ var thing = Substitute.For<Thing>();

The more coupled your tests are to verifying the behaviour of the underlying code through Mock, then the more effort the migration appears to be.