Mattia Tommasone
Mattia Tommasone
Makes perfect sense to me, and yes I'd keep the backwards compatibility initially, deprecate the old location and then remove it altogether in a subsequent release, if possible. Thanks!
Please post a minimal test case that reproduces your issue: it's hard to understand what's going on without it.
Yep, the ByteBuddy version we depend on is still 1.15.11, but I'm definitely in favor of upgrading Android instrumentation to be able to use the latest version of ByteBuddy instead...
It's not, but I'd gladly review a PR to add it.
Do I understand correctly that the helper functions you are using are backwards compatible with Kotlin versions < 2.3? If so, they can be added to the API.kt file in...
The best way I can think of for an opt-in feature is to put it in a separate module, so users who want it can just add it to their...
This could be related to the switch from `redefine` to `decorate`. @marcelstoer, @sgerke-1L, any ideas?
Your `every` definition doesn't look right to me. It should be, for a method returning `Unit`, ``` every { myMock.doSomething() } just runs ```
Thanks for looking into this! However, I think throwing exceptions by default is a bit too much and will likely break too many existing applications; I think it'd be better...
Can you also please make sure the PR builds?