similar to: Fwd: [ mocha-Bugs-6416 ] Mock objects shouldn''t define #to_s

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

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 11-Apr-2007 15:24 Subject: [ mocha-Bugs-5892 ] Using a setup method in test_case_class destroys subsequent test cases To: noreply at rubyforge.org Bugs item #5892, was opened at 2006-09-25 07:49 You can respond by visiting:

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 30-Jun-2007 14:33 Subject: [ mocha-Bugs-11885 ] never doesn''t work with stub_everything To: noreply at rubyforge.org Bugs item #11885, was opened at 2007-06-27 14:13 You can respond by visiting:

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 11-Apr-2007 15:31 Subject: [ mocha-Bugs-8687 ] Block''s return value is dropped on stubbed yielding methods. To: noreply at rubyforge.org Bugs item #8687, was opened at 2007-02-15 17:29 You can respond by visiting:

Thanks for reporting the bug below. You''re absolutely right. Renamed Range#to_s implementation to #mocha_inspect and checked first and last respond_to?(:to_f) as you suggested. Sorry for the delay - I wasn''t monitoring the rubyforge trackers. I am now! Should be fixed in revision 99 of trunk. -- James. http://blog.floehopper.org ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From:

Begin forwarded message: > From: <noreply at rubyforge.org> > Date: 15 June 2007 10:44:07 BDT > To: noreply at rubyforge.org > Subject: [ mocha-Patches-11583 ] Mocha 0.5.0 throwing unexpected > warnings, one line patch included > > Patches item #11583, was opened at 2007-06-14 21:28 > You can respond by visiting: > http://rubyforge.org/tracker/? >

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 11-Apr-2007 15:31 Subject: [ mocha-Feature Requests-5856 ] Stubbing of private methods should be allowed To: noreply at rubyforge.org Feature Requests item #5856, was opened at 2006-09-22 17:03 You can respond by visiting:

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 20 Dec 2007 15:48 Subject: [ mocha-Patches-16424 ] Ruby 1.9 Compatibility To: noreply at rubyforge.org Patches item #16424, was opened at 2007-12-19 02:43 You can respond by visiting: http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=7479&aid=16424&group_id=1917 Category: None

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 25 Oct 2007 14:01 Subject: [ mocha-Feature Requests-15021 ] without or not params matcher To: noreply at rubyforge.org Feature Requests item #15021, was opened at 2007-10-24 15:33 You can respond by visiting:

---------- 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:

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 04-Jul-2007 19:21 Subject: [ mocha-Bugs-12001 ] Method call count is not reported correctly on error To: noreply at rubyforge.org Bugs item #12001, was opened at 2007-07-04 15:21 You can respond by visiting:

---------- 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:

Hi James, > From: James Mead <jamesmead44 at gmail.com> > Date: Mar 5, 2007 5:15 AM > Subject: Re: [mocha-developer] Rails functional testing and Mocha > To: mocha-developer at rubyforge.org > "I''d probably stub the call to find not expect it, because its a query not a command" I have a different perspective on when to use stubs and when to use mocks and

Hi guys, I''m running mocha (0.3.2) against Rails core and just found an issue where the mock doesn''t go away after the test is run. For example: def test_reset_bang_doesn_reinstall_named_routes ActionController::Routing::Routes.named_routes.expects(:install).never @session.reset! end def test_zzz puts ActionController::Routing::Routes.named_routes.inspect

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, (Mocha and Stubba are great, btw.) Is there any way to alias the call to .type in Mocha? The issue is that AR effectively aliases the normal type method for the Column class (for whatever Adapter.) My code is reflecting on the adapter methods to iterate over the columns in a particular model. This makes it hard to write test code that stubs out columns and mocks my models. E.g. cols =

Index: Rakefile =================================================================== --- Rakefile (revision 73) +++ Rakefile (working copy) @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ task.rdoc_dir = ''doc'' task.template = "html_with_google_analytics" task.options << "--line-numbers" << "--inline-source" -

Hi, I''m getting a conflict between the Mocha plugin and the Rails SimplyHelpful plugin. For some reason the dom_id method from SimplyHelpful is not being found in my views when the Mocha plugin is installed. The dom_id method if used in the controller works properly. This is the error I get when running the tests: 1) Error: test_truth(HmmControllerTest):

I happened to mix ryan bates'' authentication scaffold with rspec_scaffold on a demo project. and ran into the problem of mixing mock frameworks...ryan uses mocha. So, as a learning experience, I choose to redo ryan''s tests without mocha but ran into a strange problem with tests of the User model. With debugging you can see.... If you run just the user_spec.rb file, everything

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: