similar to: Preferred mock framework

Hi I hope this is not OT. I''m training my replacement at work to do BDD Rails development. He''s done a CS/maths degree but has no professional programming experience, so he''s never NOT done a project without BDD. In a way I am jealous of his unspoilt situation :) I''ve gone about things this way: * first teach him some Ruby (he did mainly Java at

Hi I can''t get heckle working. In fact, I''ve built an example so simple that it either shows a bug, or I am being really, REALLY stupid. Heckle does not appear to support RSpec directly, so I''m trying to use spec --heckle (RSpec trunk as of 10 mins ago, Heckle 1.4.1). I''ve constructed this pair of sample files: 18> ~/Desktop/heckle_test % cat

Bleeding-edge story-writers, How are you structuring your specs? I am working on a new project and tried this: ./lib ./blah ./spec ./blah ./stories But it breaks autotest, so I moved stories parallel to lib and spec. Also what about suffixes? I have adopted "xyz_story_spec.rb", and "xyz.story" for the time being, with the line runner =

On Oct 31, 2007 11:36 AM, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists at railsnewbie.com> wrote: > When can we expect the next release of rspec? Definitely by the end of November. Likely by mid-November. Hopefully in a matter of days. The next release will be 1.1.0. We''re going to a release model in which 1.odd.x will be considered experimental. This means that while we will document

Hi Recently I sent a modified version of the GetBundle bundle to textmate-dev. It was failing because the RSpec bundle was from another repo (ie RubyForge). One of the replies said that the RSpec bundle was now in the MacroMates repo, which it is. Is that an officially handled thing? If so, what version of the RSpec bundle is being maintained there - CURRENT? It''s

Hi all, The following only affects people who have bravely begun to experiment with the 2 day-old plain text story runner and definable groups of steps. For those who fit that bill, I just committed a few changes that will require you to make changes to your code. The StepMatchers class is now the StepGroup class. The step_matchers methods on PlainTextStoryRunner and StepGroup is now just

Hi Something that''s gnawing at me... to avoid using the SQLite3 gem I''m stubbing it out like this: before(:each) do @database = mock("SQLite3 database") SQLite3 = Module.new SQLite3::Database = Class.new SQLite3::Database.stub!(:new).and_return(@database) end But then it keeps nagging me:

Hi I''m loading a gem on demand but can''t find a way to spec it. Assuming rubygems is already loaded, I assumed the following would work: describe SqliteConnection, " class" do it "should require ''sqlite3''" do Kernel.should_receive(:require).with("sqlite3") SqliteConnection.new end end Unfortunately

Is it possible to create a stub that returns hash values. For example I would like to convert this: @siteItem = stub(''plmSiteItem'', :one => "uno") To something like this: @siteItem = stub(''plmSiteItem'', {''one'' => ''uno'', ''two'' => ''dos''} ) So that I can do this:

Given the following ApplicationController specs: describe ApplicationController, "one facet", :shared => true do it ''foo'' ... it ''bar'' ... end describe ApplicationController, "some other facet", :shared => true do it ''abc'' ... it ''xyz'' ... end describe

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Scott Taylor <scott at railsnewbie.com> wrote: > > On Oct 14, 2009, at 3:36 PM, Joaquin Rivera Padron wrote: > > hello there, > how do you tipically spec private methods? The thing is ? have something > like this: > > def some_method > ?? complex_method + other_complex_methods > end > > private > def complex_method...

Hi I''ve come up with a problem using RSpec on a model class in my rails app. I wanted to test that some data was being cached for some calculations, so rather than do state-based testing I tried to specify that the method that fetches the data should NOT be called when I call the calculate method. However in doing so I have to simulate the return value, which is about 27

Hi guys, I have a weird failing spec, for which I just cannot figure out the reason of failure. I''m now rewriting my controller specs based on the advice of David and Ashley, and I got stuck on this (see: [rspec- users] specing rescue, ensure and else blocks of an Exception). http://pastie.caboo.se/111221 I''ve tried everything, like stubbing out :update_attributes! , even

Is there any way to do foo.should (be_nil || be_empty) in rspec. Thanks in advance -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20081104/ee43c9c9/attachment.html>

Hi I''ve been doing this a while now. If I have a class that responds to : [], and all I''m interested in stubbing is that method, then instead of using a mock I just create a hash. (Similarly, you could create an array when you are testing an Enumerable object.) Example from code I just worked on, where uses MigrationGraph#[] looks up graph vertices by name:

Hi Easy one - I just wondered why all spec files for rspec_on_rails end "_spec.rb" instead of just ".rb"? They are all inside the spec folder so surely the fact they are specs is implicit? Ashley

Hello. You''re saying that: To get rspec to behave as it did before this change, use this: --pattern "**/*.rb" I tried like this (rspec 1.03) and it wasn''t same as before (rspec 1.08). Now it also loads all other files in current directory and in all subdirectories and not only from directory and subdirectories given to spec as a parameter. So, for example, I have

I vote for spec''ing. Anybody else?

Forgot post this when I did it... For anyone else that used the "aspect" method of the rspec-ext gem, here''s a New World version of the code to drop into spec_helper.rb. (I''m assuming rspec-ext hasn''t been updated since I did this a week or two ago) module Spec module DSL module BehaviourEval module ModuleMethods def

I''ve noticed that I phrase a lot of shared behaviours in plural, eg describe "All payment_details views" How about a "they" alias to "it" so you can write describe "All payment_details views", :shared => true do they "should have a card number field" do # ... end end WDYT? Ashley