similar to: flex mock?

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!

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

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

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

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

Anyone know how to stub Kernel#open? I''m trying to mock/stub an open-uri call, but it doesn''t seem to like it. Here''s the test code, and the failures: body = File.open(File.dirname(__FILE__) + ''/../fixtures/google_search_california.html'').read

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kevin Clark <kevin.clark at gmail.com> Date: 01-Sep-2006 20:31 Subject: Dealing with exec? To: James Mead <jamesmead44 at gmail.com> Hey James, Sorry to bug you. I was curious how you''d handle a call to exec in a method you were testing. Kernel.stubs(:exec)... doesn''t seem to work but I''m not sure where else an

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 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

This drives me insane on a regular basis. How does one mock system(''blah'') or `blah` ? Adding expectations on Kernel doesn''t do it. Adding expectations on Object just makes me sad: Object.any_instance.expects(:system).with(''ls'') # => #<Mock:0x12b584e>.system(''ls'') - expected calls: 0, actual calls: 1 And this really

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 pushing a major overhaul in testing the Rails codebase. Mocha and stubba make my life easy so that''s what I''m using. The first major patch using them is in RailTies (http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/5970) now. I spoke to DHH today about using it in the other libraries and I think it''ll be ok, but they really want to include as little code as needed. I

I really like the idea of Mock Proxies as explained in Brian Takita''s post here: http://pivots.pivotallabs.com/users/brian/blog/articles/352-introducing-rr I posted to this list eariler with an incomplete implementation of .stops_mocking in the thread "Mocking Time, delegating to original object." The Mock Proxy pattern would make this simpler.

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

I find that a lot of times I want to ensure a method gets called exactly once, for example when testing caching or eager loading. What does the list think of adding this little humane method to Mocha::Expectation? def once times(1) self end which means this: def test_should_only_grab_post_once_from_the_cache Post.expects(:get_cache).with(google_vs_yahoo.id).times(1)

Hello all, I''m having difficulty setting up mocks such that I can verify that Rails was going to render the right template file (for example new.rhtml) and stop Rails from performing the actual rendering. After peeking at Rails'' internals, I tried two techniques as illustrated here: http://pastie.caboo.se/18197 Neither worked. I think the first one failed because Rails

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

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

* Hamcrest-style parameter matchers * Values returned and exceptions raised on consecutive invocations * Yields on consecutive invocations * Multiple yields on single invocation * Invocation dispatch fixed * Deprecated returning result of a Proc -- James. http://blog.floehopper.org

Right now I''m working on adding tests to a method that looks like this: def get_via_redirect(path, args={}) get path, args follow_redirect! while redirect? status end So, I want to confirm that get is called and that status is returned but I also want to see that when the value of redirect? effects how many times follow_redirect is called. Is there