rspec users - Aug 2007 - describing a mock_model as being an instance

Is there a built-in way of describing a mock_model as being an instance, beyond 
stubbing the eval("Object.methods - Object.new.methods") methods to
throw
NoMethodErrors?

Edward

On 8/19/07, Edward Ocampo-Gooding <edward.og at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Is there a built-in way of describing a mock_model as being an instance,
beyond
> stubbing the eval("Object.methods - Object.new.methods") methods
to throw
> NoMethodErrors?
Huh? Can you give an example of what you are trying to achieve?
>
> Edward
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On 8/19/07, Edward Ocampo-Gooding <edward.og at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Is there a built-in way of describing a mock_model as being an
instance, beyond
>> stubbing the eval("Object.methods - Object.new.methods")
methods to throw
>> NoMethodErrors?
> 
> Huh? Can you give an example of what you are trying to achieve?
I''m writing a method that involves deciding if an object is a class or
an
instance of a class. Right now I''m creating a mock_model and setting up
an
expectation on respond_to? :new but I''ve got a feeling that this
isn''t the way
to go.

The current mock_model returns an object that looks more like a class based on 
the methods it has (I should actually go look now and check if it''s got
the
typical instantiated Object methods too...), and I''m wondering if
there''s a
clean way of creating a mock_model instance that has typical instantiated Object
methods and no Object class methods.

Edward

On 8/19/07, Edward Ocampo-Gooding <edward.og at gmail.com>
wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
> > On 8/19/07, Edward Ocampo-Gooding <edward.og at gmail.com>
wrote:
> >> Is there a built-in way of describing a mock_model as being an
instance, beyond
> >> stubbing the eval("Object.methods - Object.new.methods")
methods to throw
> >> NoMethodErrors?
> >
> > Huh? Can you give an example of what you are trying to achieve?
>
> I''m writing a method that involves deciding if an object is a
class or an
> instance of a class. Right now I''m creating a mock_model and
setting up an
> expectation on respond_to? :new but I''ve got a feeling that this
isn''t the way
> to go.
>
> The current mock_model returns an object that looks more like a class based
on
> the methods it has (I should actually go look now and check if
it''s got the
> typical instantiated Object methods too...), and I''m wondering if
there''s a
> clean way of creating a mock_model instance that has typical instantiated
Object
> methods and no Object class methods.
>
> Edward
>
>
Is there a reason it needs to be more complicated than this?

class Foo
end

Foo.is_a?(Class)
=> true

Foo.new.is_a?(Class)
=> false

Courtenay wrote:
> Is there a reason it needs to be more complicated than this?
> 
> class Foo
> end
> 
> Foo.is_a?(Class)
> => true
> 
> Foo.new.is_a?(Class)
> => false
You can do that? Whoaaaaa...

That totally makes sense. I also found out about Object#instance_of? yesterday.

Thanks for the tip!

Edward