similar to: Mocha 0.3 released with Rails plugin

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 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

So I finally got round to releasing a new version<http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=1917&release_id=9184>of Mocha <http://mocha.rubyforge.org/>. Much of the functionality has been available for some time if you''ve been using the Rails plugin based on subversion HEAD, but now you can get it in all in a gem (or other package). The most recent changes centre around allowing

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

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:

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: James Mead <jamesmead44 at gmail.com> Date: 07-Mar-2007 10:04 Subject: Re: Mocha raise exception first call, return value second call To: ruby-talk at ruby-lang.org On 07/03/07, Raymond O''Connor <nappin713 at yahoo.com> wrote: > > Is there a way to have mocha raise an exception the first time an stub > is called, and then

---------- 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: 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:

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

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 =

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: noreply at rubyforge.org <noreply at rubyforge.org> Date: 11-Apr-2007 15:07 Subject: [ mocha-Bugs-6416 ] Mock objects shouldn''t define #to_s To: noreply at rubyforge.org Bugs item #6416, was opened at 2006-10-31 15:34 You can respond by visiting: http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=7477&aid=6416&group_id=1917

---------- 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

I prefer to use rspec than test::unit for developing my apps. However I''ve found its mocking library to be pretty inflexible compared to Mocha. This isn''t really a surprise since rspec isn''t intended as a mocking framework, whereas Mocha is. So I''d like to play to both of their strengths and use rspec as my testing/specification framework and Mocha do to

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

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 Dylan, See my comments inline. On 15/08/06, Dylan Bruzenak <dylanb at digitalvalence.com> wrote: > I had to put in the method() change so that I could do: > > phone_book = mock > phone_book.method(''lookup'').call(''jim'', ''johnson'', ''tx'') > > and have it behave as if I had just called lookup directly.

On 31/12/06, Tobias L?tke <tobias.luetke at gmail.com> wrote: > > I just replaced various homegrown stubbing and mocking facilities in > Shopify and wanted to let you know my appreciation for this fantastic > library of yours. I love the user interface and the internal code is > something to behold as well. Thanks - I''m glad you''ve found it useful.

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: J. B. Rainsberger <jbrains762 at gmail.com> Date: 02-Dec-2006 02:48 Subject: Re: Mocha and ActiveRecord To: ruby-talk ML <ruby-talk at ruby-lang.org> James Mead wrote: > On 28/11/06, J. B. Rainsberger <jbrains762 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Suppose I have an Order, which has_many OrderItems. Suppose I want to >>

* 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

I''ve recently upgraded to the latest versions of Mocha and RSpec (0.3.2 and 0.6.3 respectively) and I''m no longer able to use Mocha/ Stubba with RSpec. Its actually only Stubba I''m interested in as I use RSpec''s built-in mocking library. I require stubba in my spec file but whenever I try and run my spec it fails with the error: Unintialized constant