rspec users - Mar 2010 - Mock "Consent_6335" received unexpected message :marked_for_destruction? with (no args)

I have a mock object (Person) that is associated with another object
(my_object) through a belongs_to association. When I check whether
my_object is valid (my_object.should be_valid), I am getting an error
like the following:

Mock "Person_6338" received unexpected
message :marked_for_destruction? with (no args)

Checking the list of methods on the mock, "marked_for_destruction?" is
not listed. Is this this something that i should expect to always
stub?

As a check, I added

          def  @target.marked_for_destruction?
            false
          end

to the mock_model definition and the test passed.

Rails 2.3.5
rspec (1.3.0, 1.2.6, 1.1.3)
rspec-rails (1.3.2, 1.2.6)

Instead of

def  @target.marked_for_destruction?
    false
end

i added marked_for_destruction in the list of stubs included in
mock_model

        options_and_stubs = options_and_stubs.reverse_merge({
          :id => id,
          :to_param => id.to_s,
          :new_record? => false,
          :destroyed? => false,
          :marked_for_destruction? => false,
          :errors => stub("errors", :count => 0)
        })

This seemed like a better place.


On Mar 24, 2:39?pm, thoen <th... at edgevaleinteractive.com>
wrote:
> I have a mock object (Person) that is associated with another object
> (my_object) through a belongs_to association. When I check whether
> my_object is valid (my_object.should be_valid), I am getting an error
> like the following:
>
> Mock "Person_6338" received unexpected
> message :marked_for_destruction? with (no args)
>
> Checking the list of methods on the mock,
"marked_for_destruction?" is
> not listed. Is this this something that i should expect to always
> stub?
>
> As a check, I added
>
> ? ? ? ? ? def ?@target.marked_for_destruction?
> ? ? ? ? ? ? false
> ? ? ? ? ? end
>
> to the mock_model definition and the test passed.
>
> Rails 2.3.5
> rspec (1.3.0, 1.2.6, 1.1.3)
> rspec-rails (1.3.2, 1.2.6)
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at
rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 1:49 PM, thoen <thoen at edgevaleinteractive.com>
wrote:
> On Mar 24, 2:39?pm, thoen <th... at edgevaleinteractive.com> wrote:
>> I have a mock object (Person) that is associated with another object
>> (my_object) through a belongs_to association. When I check whether
>> my_object is valid (my_object.should be_valid), I am getting an error
>> like the following:
>>
>> Mock "Person_6338" received unexpected
>> message :marked_for_destruction? with (no args)
>>
>> Checking the list of methods on the mock,
"marked_for_destruction?" is
>> not listed. Is this this something that i should expect to always
>> stub?
>>
>> As a check, I added
>>
>> ? ? ? ? ? def ?@target.marked_for_destruction?
>> ? ? ? ? ? ? false
>> ? ? ? ? ? end
>>
>> to the mock_model definition and the test passed.
>>
>> Rails 2.3.5
>> rspec (1.3.0, 1.2.6, 1.1.3)
>> rspec-rails (1.3.2, 1.2.6)
> Instead of
>
> def ?@target.marked_for_destruction?
> ? ?false
> end
>
> i added marked_for_destruction in the list of stubs included in
> mock_model
>
> ? ? ? ?options_and_stubs = options_and_stubs.reverse_merge({
> ? ? ? ? ?:id => id,
> ? ? ? ? ?:to_param => id.to_s,
> ? ? ? ? ?:new_record? => false,
> ? ? ? ? ?:destroyed? => false,
> ? ? ? ? ?:marked_for_destruction? => false,
> ? ? ? ? ?:errors => stub("errors", :count => 0)
> ? ? ? ?})
>
> This seemed like a better place.
http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec-rails/commit/ad76867f28cb0ca05925e74eacb4cf81b934ce27

It''ll be part of rspec-rails-1.3.3