similar to: should_receive stubs methods?

I''m wondering what''s the difference between stub and message expectation with any_number_of_times, for example: myMock = mock("mymock") myMock.stub!(:is_a?).with(MyClass).and_return(false) and myMock = mock("mymock") myMock.should_receive(:is_a?).with(MyClass).any_number_of_times.and_return(false) because is_a? may not be called at all, it just like a

Hey all - The trunk currently supports three types of mocking/stubbing: Mock Objects (created dynamically at runtime) Partial Mocking of methods on existing classes Stubbing of methods on existing objects or classes The main difference between Partial Mocking and Stubbing is that Stubs don''t verify. I''m wondering if we really need the stubbing facility at all, given that we

Hi, It appears that if I have 2 should_receives in a row, the latest one overrides the previous one(s). If there isn''t one, could we add a way to accumulate them, such as @thing.should_receive(:method).and_return(@value) @thing.should_receive(:method).again.and_return(@value) @thing.should_receive(:method).again.and_return(@value) would be equivalent to

Hey list, RSpec is great, I''ve been using it at work for a couple of months now. One gripe I have is that I find it hard to know exactly to what extent my code is covered by the specs. I am aware of RCov and Heckle; they''re great, but I''d like to demonstrate another perspective of coverage analysis I''ve hacked up. The perspective is that of what is mocked and

I am setting up an AR mock object and wanted to sanity check it. My intent is to mix this into all my examples and then override/add methods where necessary. Note that I''ve anticipated three cases for find: find with one numeric argument => object find with :all => Array find with anything else => nil This roughly approximates how ActiveRecord::find works in this case

What is the correct way to mock out the errors on a Rails model? I''m assuming i need to say @mock_thing = mock_model(Thing) @mock_thing_errors = mock("errors") @mock_thing_errors.should_receive(:full_messages).and_return("An error") @mock_thing.should_receive(:errors).and_return(@mock_thing_errors) Just wanted to check the best practice on this kind of thing and how

The ability to choose a mocking framework is great as I prefer mocha, but I am have problems. On my controller specs, I am forced to ''integrate_views'' as the following code below shows you, the mocking of views is rspec specific. See stub! versus mocha''s stub unless block_given? unless integrate_views?

Hi All I''m working on converting some existing controller specs to use mocks and stubs rather than real ActiveRecord objects in a Rails project. In one of my controller actions, I use a database transaction. So, the obvious thing to do is have this in my setup block: Project.stub!(:transaction) Firstly, is there an easy way to have that stub yield to the block passed to any

There is one annoyance I''m encountering with the Mock API in rSpec. Overall it works well, as far as dynamic mocks go ;)... but there''s this one thing... It doesn''t allow overriding of expectations. example: m = mock("blah") m.should_receive(:one).any_number_of_times().and_return(1) m.should_receive(:one).and_return(1) The second call to should_receive

I have the following statement mock_requester.should_receive(:request_with).with ("x").any_number_of_times.and_return(@object) which works fine, but when i do it backwards, which makes the same amount of sense syntactically, it fails mock_requester.should_receive(:request_with).with("x").and_return (@object).any_number_of_times are all of the mock options

I am not sure why the tests don''t see the call of the new method for the Address class. It can be seen in the controller method where the Address.new is called. >> @address = Address.new(params[:address]) What am I doing wrong? Thanks for the help. Here is the error message: Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in ''UsersController handling POST /users should create a new

Hey list, Does anything exist that can show me which lines are explicitly tested? RCov is great, but it doesn''t really give a sense of _actual_ coverage, indeed, there is no guarantee that functions executed were in fact called as the result of a line being tested. I know nothing of the rspec internals, but would a simple list of executed lines be a relatively simple feature to add?

What is the general opinion about fixtures versus mocking and stubbing in model specs? I heard from agile on IRC that they save the database testing for integration testing, but I also see that the caboose sample applicaiton uses fixtures. I also noticed that on the rspec site, it says "Ironically (for the traditional TDD''er) these are the only specs that we feel should actually

Let''s say you''re using the restful_authentication plugin. You have a model called articles. On the index action of the articlescontroller you simply want to spec out that it''ll scope the results to the ownership of the current_user. It should NOT include any articles other than the articles that user owns. How would you properly spec this out? Thanks for the help!

I saw in one of Dave C.''s comments to a ticket that "our current plan is to deprecate the mocking framework." I hadn''t heard anything about that, but then again I haven''t paid super close attention to the list. Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using Mocha (or any other framework one might want to plug in?). Pat

hi I''m using restful_authentication and have controller specs working using users fixtures (and login_as) however i''ve been trying for hours without success to do it without fixtures, using mocks and stubs instead. anyone here done this? got code? :) thanks

Hey guys! I am using rspec trunk, and I am having a little problem with the latest version. (I am quite sure this worked with an older version about a week ago) heres the spec: it "should render the new user form without layout for a xhr request" do @controller.should_receive(:render).with(:layout=>false) xhr :get,:new end and the controller: def new render

I want to use mocks and stubs to test the controller, but am having trouble getting my validation not to trigger. Here''s the code: # spec: Image.stub!(:find).and_return(@image) @image.should_receive(:save!).once.with(:any_args) put :update, :id => @image.id, :category_id => @category.id, :image => {:name => ''test'', :image_number =>

I was looking over some of my specs. I was thinking that the following: @game.should_receive(:name).and_return(''The Battle for Blaze'') @game.should_receive(:people).and_return(5000000) @game.should_receive(:activated).and_return(true) Would it look cleaner if I could do this instead? @game.should_recieve_and_return( :name => ''The Battle for Blaze''

Given this code (which renders rjs), I''m faced with the fixture- driven way of spec-ing or mocking. How the heck to you mock this so the code at line (2) and (4) work right? I''m still struggling with mocks but it seems like this can be done. Forgive the naivety of this question. 1. def change_quantity 2. @line_item = LineItem.find_by_id(params[:id]) 3. unless