On 7/24/06, aslak hellesoy <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com>
wrote:> On 7/24/06, Chris Roos <chrisjroos at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Am I correct in thinking that it''s not currently possible to
have a
> > method that creates a ''standard'' mock (i.e. a mock
that has defaults
> > useful in all contexts)?
> >
>
> It should be possible to do that. Can you be more specific about what
> you mean by defaults?
>
Although I don''t currently need this anymore... I was wanting a way
to create a mock object that responded in certain ways to some stock
messages. I then wanted to be able to use this mock in each of my
different contexts by customising it with expectations.
> > I''ve tried with the mock method and also by manually creating
new Mock
> > instances. I get failures when setting up expectations (undefined
> > method ''receive'' for proc).
> >
>
> Please provide some code so we can see what you''re trying to do.
> Also, which version of RSpec are you using?
>
Version 0.5.15. I was doing something like...
def mock_row
row = mock(''row'')
row.expects(:foo).returns(''bar'')
row
end
... and then trying to re-use it in my context set-ups. This is where I
got the error stated in the original email.
The reason that this is no longer required is because I realised the
way to ensure that message _are not_ received (receive(:foo).never).
This allows me to set my mocks as null_objects and remove lots of the
duplication that I was trying to solve with this ''default
mock''
Cheers,
Chris
> > Chris
> > _______________________________________________
> > Rspec-users mailing list
> > Rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Rspec-users mailing list
> Rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>