similar to: Proxies

I was reading through the FlexMock docs and noticed the expectation method .mock, which returns the original mock associated with an expectation. It looks really handy for writing nice all-in-one mocks like: mock_user = mock(''User'').expects(:first_name).returns(''Jonah'').mock So I started playing around with mocha and found I could actually already do this!

I''ve just been tying my brain in knots looking at bug #8687 ( http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=8687&group_id=1917&atid=7477 ). I''ve been (1) trying to work out whether there is anything logically wrong with Mocha''s existing behaviour and (2) whether Mocha should support the requested functionality. It all centres around the use of the

A number of people have had difficulties subscribing and/or sending messages to the existing mailing list. Also I have to spend quite a bit of time moderating spam and the mailman interface is pretty clunky. So I was contemplating setting a Google Group up instead. Does anyone have any objections? -- James. http://blog.floehopper.org http://tumble.floehopper.org

We''re encountering a failure with Mocha 0.5.6. We had this expectation: game_version.expects(:attributes=).with(:game_file => kind_of(GameFile), :game_id => @game.id) This expectation was passing with 0.5.5, but fails with 0.5.6. I added this test to parameter_matcher_acceptance_test.rb, which passes in 0.5.5 and fails in 0.5.6 def test_should_match_nested_parameters

On 13/11/2007, Pradeep Gatram <pradeep.gatram at gmail.com> wrote: > > Let me put my dilemma as an example. Take a look at a snippet from > FooTest. > > #using mocha > def test_method1 > Bar.expects(:method2).with(''param1'', ''param2'').once > Foo.method1 > end > > And now the implementation > > class Foo > def

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 11-Apr-2007 15:39 Subject: [ mocha-Feature Requests-7119 ] ability to specify call order To: noreply at rubyforge.org Feature Requests item #7119, was opened at 2006-12-06 00:30 You can respond by visiting:

Hi James, Jim, and everyone else who''s listening. I''ve been investigating an interesting bug related to mocks and rails AssociationProxies. See http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=3149&aid=12547&group_id=797 for details. The crux is that if you do this (rspec mock syntax): obj.should_receive(:msg).with(mock_of_a_model) and the implementation does

Hi I''m using Mocha 0.5.3 and I want to stub out a call to Time.now, just like the example in the post http://blog.floehopper.org/articles/2007/06/08/mocha-0-5-released However, trying it in irb gets me the following error: >> require ''mocha'' => true >> Time.stubs(:now).returns(Time.parse(''Thu Feb 01 00:00:00 UTC 2007'')) NoMethodError:

Hi all - I''ve recently made the leap from FlexMock to Mocha for mocks within my app. Today I decided to upgrade from Mocha 0.3.2 to Mocha 0.4.0. So I updated the gem, started rake and went to get some coffee. I came back 5 mins later and my units (which were clean) are now reporting 97 failures (!!!). Every failure reports a callstack like this: 18) Error:

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 7 Sep 2007 22:43 Subject: [ mocha-Feature Requests-13763 ] add with_any_arguments method To: noreply at rubyforge.org Feature Requests item #13763, was opened at 2007-09-07 17:43 You can respond by visiting:

I wanted to draw attention to this bug report [A] which highlights a change that was made between Mocha 0.4 and 0.5. It may have lead to tests which pass unexpectedly. Does my explanation (below) make sense to people? It feels like we should at least add some warnings to the documentation. You are correct that this behaviour did change between Mocha v0.4.0 and > v0.5.0 (in revision 115).

FYI - I''ve just released Mocha 0.5.6 to make Ruby 1.9 compatibility fixes available for those using released packages rather than subversion trunk. I''m not feeling well and so haven''t been able to test it other than by running all the tests using Ruby 1.9. Please let me know if you have any problems using it. Remember that it sometimes takes a while for a new gem

I''d like to create expectations on just portions of the arguments a function takes. For example, I want to verify that the a certain ActiveRecord association extension adds an order clause to the find options hash. Currently I simply check the entire argument structure, something like this def test_referring_journals_should_order_by_citation_count article =

I recently noticed some anomalies in the Mocha RDoc. Within a method RDoc comment, any word that happens to be the same as a method in the same class gets turned into a link. You can see an example [2] with the word "once" and another [3] with the words "yields", "times" and "with". Does anyone know how to stop these words incorrectly being made into

FYI - Jim Weirich just released an rspec-compatible version of FlexMock. For those of you using trunk, you can now use either FlexMock, Mocha, or RSpec''s built-in mocking framework by saying: Spec::Runner.configure do |config| config.mock_with :flexmock # or :mocha or :rspec (default) end The choice is yours. Mock in peace. Cheers, David ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From:

Has anybody been using Mocha trunk over the last month or two? I''ve done quite a bit of internal refactoring and wondered whether anyone had any problems. There are also a bunch of new features e.g. states, sequences, extra parameter matchers & configurable warnings, but these are not documented in the on-line rdoc. I wondered if anyone has been looking at the rdoc in trunk and

We''ve been working with the ParameterMatchers (so cool!) but I don''t see a way to insure a method is called with no arguments. I imagined something like: user = mock(''User'') user.expects(:friends).with(nothing) Anyone run into this?

I''m not sure why mailman bounced your message (perhaps because you are not subscribed to the mailing list), but I''m glad you have solved your problem. Cheers, James. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: mailman-bounces at rubyforge.org <mailman-bounces at rubyforge.org> Date: 14 Oct 2007 17:21 Subject: Content filtered message notification To:

Just curious - now that rspec (as of 0.9) let''s you choose your mock framework, how many of you are actually using (or planning to use) mocha or flexmock? Anybody planning to use any other mock framework besides rspec, mocha or flexmock? Thanks, David

In my Unit tests, I run into the all-too-common problem of Time.expects(:now) being called by Benchmark before the method is unmocked. Instead of messing around with the teardown order, I decided to modify the Expectation with a new method, .stops_mocking. Here are the changes I use, including a few monkey patches to push relevant objects down to where I want them, all wrapped up in a big ugly