similar to: With Parameter Block

I''m not sure if this is by design, but I''ve stumbled across this a few times trying to debug my own tests. If an assertion fails the test, and a mock expectation was to blame, the test''s failure / error messages don''t give enough info. I''ve had to resort to def teardown mocha_verify end which just gets tedious. I''ve created a patch

i''m having problem with a form_for situation where i''m trying to DRY out the repeated parts of my forms and put them in common/form and render the form elements via another partial in controller_name/_form. Here''s the first form # app/views/common/form <% form_for ... do |f| -%> <%= render :partial => "params[:controller]/form", :object => f

Hi folks. I''ve just started using rspec and I have to say it''s very nice. The thing is, I prefer mocha''s mocking dialect. So I thought a simple require ''mocha'' would set me up. Unfortunately, rspec does all its goodness using do/end blocks in anonymous classes, so it wasn''t quite that obvious. Anyway, here is the incantation I ended up

Hi, Are there any docs for combining parameter matchers, or some way to define optional parameters? I''m trying to match something like: .find( 42 ) || .find( 42, {:conditions=>nil,:includes=>nil} ) Or for that matter, 42 followed by nothing or anything... Halp? I''ve tried different nested combos with any_of/all_of/anything, but getting lost trying. --Andrew

Is there a way to do something like this? class Foo def self.hello(name) "Hello #{name}!" end end Foo.expects(:bar).with("Carl").once assert_equal "Hello Carl!", Foo.hello Basically, my problem is that once you set an expectation, the original code is never executed and is not tested. However, it''s still very useful to set expectations to

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

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 =

Hello, I have a question regarding the use of Mocha with rSpec to spec one of my methods. My spec contains the following vehical1 = mock() vehical2 = mock() vehical1.stubs(:mph).returns(150) vehical2.stubs(:mph).returns(250) comparer.add_vehical([@vehical1, @vehical2]) comparer.sort_by(:mph) The comparer is an object that has a basic "stack like" functionality, add_vehical is the

I''m writing a test where I only care about one of the parameters being sent to the method, does anyone think having a way to say that any value for a parameter which I don''t care about is valid? I''m thinking something like: def test_charge_is_for_10_bucks gateway = test_gateway member = Member.new member.credit_card_number = "1"

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''ve finally managed to find some time to do some serious work on Mocha. There are some code snippets on my blog (http://blog.floehopper.org/articles/2007/04/12/preview-of-latest-mocha-changes) showing the new functionality available in trunk (revision 128). I don''t don''t know how many people out there are using trunk, but it would be great to get some feedback on these

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?

Hi, I''m pretty new to Rspec, so hope someone can help me out with this. I''m leveraging a couple pre-existing applications in my current project, both have fairly robust test suites in Rspec already. However, one is using Rspec''s builit in mocking, and the other is using mocha. If I set config.mock_with mocha in spec_helper.rb, then all of the rspec mocks fail. If I

Hi guys, I''ve just been reading Martin Fowler''s article re mock versus stubbing<http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html>where he compares traditional TDD testing techniques with mock based testing. I''d be interested in comments from a ruby on rails perspective in terms of this and Mocha? For example: a) Do you see Mocha as a robust way to test Ruby

Hi, I''ve been reading with interest the threads trying to integrate Mocha and Stubba with RSpec. So far, I''ve made the two changes in spec_helper.rb suggested, but discovered another one that neither of the archives mentions: If you use traditional mocking: object = mock or the stub shortcut : object = stub(:method => :result), you run into namespace conflicts with

Hello, I''ve just started using Mocha in the tests for my Rails app, and I''ve run across an issue with mocking a method that should be called with different parameters. How would I setup a mock that expects that a method will be called once with no paramaters, and a second time with a parameter? I''d be tempted to shortcut and just do something like

Folks- I just started using Mocha and I wanted to try something but I couldn''t get it to work. I''m coming from the Java world, so my approach may not be optimal for Ruby. Say I''m testing a.do_something() which calls b.do_other_thing() twice, but I really don''t want to change b.do_other_thing(), just ''expect'' it to be called twice. I know I

I really can't figure out how to get and set array indices from the c interface. so to get an element I'm calling tindex = *fn\SymbolTable(*index\name) index = LLVMBuildLoad(builder,tindex,"index") arr = *fn\SymbolTable(*array\name) arrptr = LLVMBuildLoad(Builder,arr,"arrayptr") tmp = LLVMBuildGEP(Builder,arrptr,index,0,"ptr") ptr =

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

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?