rspec users - May 2012 - Stubs and contract tests

Hey guys, could you help me (in)validating an idea?

As you might know, Contract tests solve a problem stubs have: if the object
interface changes, the stubbed tests will continue passing.

In RSpec, it''s common to use a shared_context to describe contracts, so
both Posts and Comments tests would have PostsCommentsContract. If
Comment''s interface ever changed, Posts tests would present a failure
wherever we ran it. However, it won''t tell us which stubbed methods
were
invalid now; it just tell us the file that have invalid stubs.

If we had, for example, #stub_contract(:method), automatically raising
a failure if its reference (double) object''s interface changed, how
would
it be bad?

I''m trying to think the cons of it. Could you guys help me finding it?

--Alexandre
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120511/85d2f4ab/attachment.html>

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Alexandre de Oliveira <
chavedomundo at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey guys, could you help me (in)validating an idea?
>
> As you might know, Contract tests solve a problem stubs have: if the
> object interface changes, the stubbed tests will continue passing.
>
> In RSpec, it''s common to use a shared_context to describe
contracts, so
> both Posts and Comments tests would have PostsCommentsContract. If
> Comment''s interface ever changed, Posts tests would present a
failure
> wherever we ran it. However, it won''t tell us which stubbed
methods were
> invalid now; it just tell us the file that have invalid stubs.
>
> If we had, for example, #stub_contract(:method), automatically raising
> a failure if its reference (double) object''s interface changed,
how would
> it be bad?
>
> I''m trying to think the cons of it. Could you guys help me finding
it?
>
See https://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/issues/15
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120511/d13f1ff1/attachment.html>