similar to: How do you specify a rubygem is being required?

Hey guys and gals, I have a snippet of code: Net::SMTP(@host, @port, @from_domain) do |smtp| @emails.each do |email| begin smtp.send_message email.encoded, email.from, email.destinations @emails_sent += 1 rescue Exception => e # blah end end end What I want to do is: Say there are 4 emails. First email is sent OK On the second email smtp raises a IOError

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:

Greetings, I''m using rspec with rcov for my applications and there is one issue which I cannot solve nor can find any proper information regarding it: specing what is in a rescue block in case of an exception. I''m using Ruby on Rails and I usually make use of exceptions in my controllers, like the following example: def action @foo = Foo.find(1)

Is it possible to stub a Kernel method? I''m specifically interested in the ''open'' method to test some code using open-uri. I''ve tried: Kernel.should_receive(:open).with(''filename'').and_return(''data'') However, this doesn''t seem to work. Any suggestions would be appreciated. --Paul

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

Hi In light of the fact that RSpec mocks are going into maintenance mode in the near future, I was wondering what everyone was switching to. I liked the look of FlexMock most, so gave that a shot. However, there''s a few things that don''t work well with RSpec due to the traditional differences in the way Test::Unit cases are written vs RSpec specs. (One spec per

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

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

Should functions or the user be responsible for coercing an S4 object argument containing the proper object (and thus should below be considered a bug in the packages or not)? The example is with RSQLite but the same thing happens with RMySQL, and other DBI packages. > library("RSQLite") Loading required package: DBI > m <- dbDriver("SQLite") > con <-

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 =

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 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 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, I''ve been thinking about the whole validator/relationship speccing issue, and I came up with a suggestion, which I''d love to get some feedback on. The full article is available at http://www.inter-sections.net/ 2007/10/19/what-to-test-and-specify-and-where-to-do-it/ , with the relevant bit being about halfway down, but here''s the gist of it: 1.

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:

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

Hi Just trying to spec a Rails model that defaults a valid_until date to this time tomorrow. I''ve done something similar involving Dates, and you can stub the :today method to return something fixed. But when I tried this with Time, I found that RSpec calls Time.now four times per spec. So there''s no way to spec code like 1.days.from_now . The best I can come up

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 ran across the following when running spec on an old merb app. $ cat spec/spec.opts $ spec spec/models/topic_spec.rb Options written to spec/spec.opts. You can now use these options with: spec --options spec/spec.opts $ cat spec/spec.opts spec/models/topic_spec.rb $ spec spec/models/topic_spec.rb Options written to spec/spec.opts. You can now use these options with: spec --options

So in the past I''ve written a script that query''s a remote DB, takes the data, validates it, then does some processing, producing a new file with the data in a completely different format. Since this is a script with it''s own set of methods, etc, how do I go about testing the pieces parts? It seems like it should be no different than doing the rails testing I have