similar to: how does Mocha compare in terms of classical vs mock-based testing, and stubbing???

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

Hi all - does anyone know of a good blog post or wiki or something with a good guide to mocking? I''ve got some degree of responsibility for people who are creating mocks. I''m supposed to actually be telling them the best way to do it. In some cases we have code with like a bazillion mock(:x) statements and it''s kind of out of control. I have an idea how the specs should

Let''s say that I have a procedure that: * gets the number of bytes to write into some file * and returns the number of successfully written bytes def save( text, len ) This procedure is being used all over the place especially inside the method "process" which I want to test. Thus in order not to polute my filesystem I stub the "save" procedure. But of course in

Hi, Just wondering if anyone has already developed a mocking approach to stub out the Paypal interface so that one can test on an internal PC which doesn''t provide a means for PayPal to callback to your webserver? (i.e. once the app is deployed to the hosting provider it would then work as PayPal could then hit the application with the specified URL). Anyone already solved this? Would

Hi to everyone, I''m an RSpec, and BDD in general, newbie so in order to learn I have chosen to use my personal website as a tesbed. I''m having difficulties juggling with mocks, and in particula with the following code. Here''s the controller action: def create @album = Album.new(params[:album]) if @album.save flash[:notice] = "album saved"

Hi guys. Quite happy with mocha for testing. It''s been a bit of an eye opener for me, and I expect to begin using it heavily. One other thing I''d like to do is stub out particular class methods in development. Is there a way I can do this with mocha? Jason

Hi I''ve been doing this a while now. If I have a class that responds to : [], and all I''m interested in stubbing is that method, then instead of using a mock I just create a hash. (Similarly, you could create an array when you are testing an Enumerable object.) Example from code I just worked on, where uses MigrationGraph#[] looks up graph vertices by name:

I hope this isn''t too rambly. This is sort of a brain dump of a subject I''ve been thinking about for months as I''ve used RSpec. Let''s say we''ve got a simple query method, that will find all the users in the DB older than 18. Our model could look like class User < ActiveRecord::Base def self.find_older_than(age) find :all, :conditions =>

I am using the acts_as_state_machine plugin to control state of an object in my app, however when testing this I need to be able to stub out the guard conditions so that state will change when I fire off an event without depending on other models. Guard conditions simply return true or false so I have an instance method: def encoded? <check state of other objects> return true

Hi guys, Would you mind if I ask how Flex Mock and Mocha sit together? They compete directly? I read that Flex Mock was built into Rails 1.2. Is there a reason to use Mocha instead of Flex Mock? Tks Greg

Not sure if this is possible currently. I have a section of code like this: ActiveRecord::Base.transaction do cow.save! duck.save! dog.save! end (Names changed to protect the innocent.) I''d like to specify that the saves run in a transaction. I can do ActiveRecord::Base.should_receive(:transaction).and_yield But is there any way to specify that the code is

Suppose we have a method ''foo'' which internally uses another method ''bar''. Being good BDDers we mock out the ''bar'' method. After all, we only want to spec the ''foo'' method - actually running the ''bar'' method means slower, less maintainable and brittler specs. That''s why we <3 mocking,

When I try to execute the following example, I get an error message: /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/mocha-0.5.4/lib/mocha/object.rb:40: in `expects'': undefined method `stub'' for nil:NilClass (NoMethodError) from test8.rb:5 What could be the reason? I tried with the latest Mocha Ruby gem, and I also tried it with the Rails plugin. The example: require

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, 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

I''m simultaneously getting into using Mocha and RSpec-style tests (courtesy of the simply_bdd plugin) and I''m struggling with some issues while trying to organize my specs/test. Here''s a code example illustrating the problem: context "update cliient invalid data" do include ClientsControllerSpecHelper specify "should render edit form" do

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

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''d like to test that an object with the correct attributes is saved, something like: def test_create_without_existing_suite this = self w = Annotation.any_instance.expects(:save).with do |x| this.assert_equal ''fnord'', some_way_get_the_name_of_the_receiver_of_save true end w.returns true end But the object is created inside the method

OK, so i''ve played a bit with mocks and mock_models in controller and view tests and i have a question. Is this statement really correct: "We highly recommend that you exploit the mock framework here rather than providing real model objects in order to keep the view specs isolated from changes to your models." (http://rspec.rubyforge.org/documentation/rails/writing/views.html