Merge lp:~compiz-team/compiz/compiz.fix_1187468 into lp:compiz/0.9.10

[Sam Spilsbury]

  Satisfy matchers on getProperty as soon as they are set.

  The order of evaluation for matchers in Google Mock appears to be
  undefined - this means that we can't rely on the first argument being
  matched first and the second argument being matched afterwards. In turn,
  this means that any GValue may be passed to a GValueMatch which, by a
  design flaw, is unable to handle any values of a type it does not expect
  (at least not without an API change). It will silently pass the incorrect
  type to g_type_get_* which causes internal assertion failures.

  At the moment we're just interleaving the calls to getProperty and
  get_property - that way the expectations are satisfied and go away
  as soon as they're set. This in turn means that Google Mock only
  has to traverse one matcher rather than multiple matchers.

  (LP: #1187468)

  Satisfy matchers on getProperty as soon as they are set.

  The order of evaluation for matchers in Google Mock appears to be
  undefined - this means that we can't rely on the first argument being
  matched first and the second argument being matched afterwards. In turn,
  this means that any GValue may be passed to a GValueMatch which, by a
  design flaw, is unable to handle any values of a type it does not expect
  (at least not without an API change). It will silently pass the incorrect
  type to g_type_get_* which causes internal assertion failures.

  At the moment we're just interleaving the calls to getProperty and
  get_property - that way the expectations are satisfied and go away
  as soon as they're set. This in turn means that Google Mock only
  has to traverse one matcher rather than multiple matchers.

  (LP: #1187468)

[Andrea Azzarone (azzar1)]

Proposed by Sam Spilsbury 17 hours ago - Updating diff...

What??

[Sam Spilsbury (smspillaz)]

Launchpad is being weird. I'll resubmit this.

review: Needs Resubmitting

Unmerged revisions