similar to: do we need stubbing?

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

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

My app uses account_location to set up subdomains as account keys. In my controllers, all my model operations are scoped through the @current_person object. The question is: How do I test this with RSpec''s mocking and stubbing? Basically, I need to test that @current_person.things is getting the find message and returning @thing. I''ve tried stubbing and mocking

Hey, I''m using rspec and rails and have a spec that tests if a before_filter is executed, I also have a spec that tests if a method called by the filter is executed. It appears however that when I should_receive something, it is no longer actually called when I fire the http request. I''m not sure how, or where exactly I should manually fire the filter, either before or after the

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?

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

I''m new to mocking and stubbing. Can someone help me out with the following? I don''t exactly know why this spec is failing: describe "GET /users/1/terms" do controller_name :terms setup do @user = mock_model(User) User.stub!(:find).and_return(@user) end def do_get get :index, :user_id => 1 end it "should find all terms

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

Hello, Ingo! I''m copying your question to a new e-mail instead of replying to try to keep message threads separate. Have you tried setting up your expectation before issuing the get statement? For example, take this out of the setup block: get ''index'', :locale => ''en'' and move it after:

Hey, Sorry for so many questions - I''m really bad at this right now. I''m trying to cover the following code w/ rspec def index if params[:user_id] @user = User.find(params[:user_id]) @messages = @user.messages end end So basically what I''m doing is listing all the messages for a user, provided there is an id parameter. describe

Hello, I recently made a feature request with a patch for terser mocks. http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=10412&group_id=1917&atid=7480 Here are some examples with their current equivalents: the_mock.expects.foo(1,2) {|a, b| :bar} the_mock.expects.foo(1,2).returns(:bar) the_mock.expects(:foo).with(1,2) {|a, b| :bar} the_mock.expects(:foo).with(1,2).returns(:bar)

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

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 =>

Mocha''s mock/stub framework has the ability to stub all methods on a mock given. Does RSpec''s mocking framework have this ability? And if not, is there some reason it shouldn''t be implemeneted? Regards, Scott

I''m currently try to push my limits a little bit with some of my unit testing -- trying to avoid saving ActiveRecord objects to the database and take advantage of mock/stub objects. How far should I expect to get in this direction? From what I can tell, ActiveRecord seems to fight me when it comes to associations. In other words, many associations seem to require database queries.

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

I wrote this abomination just now, and wonder if anyone else has had experience with the pattern behind it. In short, I''m specing an after_create hook on an ActiveRecord model, that calls a bunch of private methods. Instead of stubbing all those private methods (which is verboten anyway, as well as impossible because creating the object which owns those methods is what I''m

I''ve found myself mocking out a published api in my set-up method. This has led to some contexts having a large set-up and empty specifications. As the mocks get auto-verified, the specification blocks have nothing to do but serve as documentation. Does this sound bad? Chris