Joshua Harshman

@nestoroprysk please add a description to your PR. Add details that will help maintainers get on the same page as you about this change.

@aawsome I think this is a good addition. It's something I can put on the roadmap after 1.0.0 is released.

IMO this PR overreaches a little over what was originally intended. Changing to Go modules is great but not required for this feature. I think there is a case for...

Thanks for making this independent of #840 . Maybe some clarification on the goal here was needed because it seems to have strayed away from the original issue you referenced....

@umarcor thanks for taking the time to detail your approach and solution. Looks like one of the tests doesn't like the `go tool vet` command. ``` +vet: invoking "go tool...

API changes are not on the roadmap for the 1.0.0. Bugs, cleanup, and documentation tasks are being targeted for 1.0.0.

@stevefan1999-personal, this is an interesting problem but I'm not so sure that there needs to be a bespoke solution for this. Also as an aside - the project where you...

Unfortunately that doesn't resolve the repetitiveness of setting up the mock controller every single iteration of the table. I think the root of the problem here is that one can't...

Setting up the mock controller & expectation each iteration. The best way I have found to do it is in a loop like so: ``` for _, v := range...

I agree, I've seen others have the same question on why they can't re-set the expectation. I'll look into adding some sample code.