similar to: RFC: Reconsidering adding gmock to LLVM's unittest utilities

> On Jan 4, 2017, at 9:49 AM, Zachary Turner via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > TL;DR - I want this. For the most part, +1 from me too. A few comments though. > > On Wed, Jan 4, 2017 at 6:11 AM Chandler Carruth via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > ## Matchers > > To start off, it

Hello, GCC 9.0 introduces a new warning checkers and some of them found possible issues in LLVM. In file included from /home/davidbolvansky/trunk/llvm/include/llvm/Analysis/LazyCallGraph.h:38, from /home/davidbolvansky/trunk/llvm/unittests/Analysis/LazyCallGraphTest.cpp:10: /home/davidbolvansky/trunk/llvm/include/llvm/ADT/ArrayRef.h: In instantiation of

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

On 16 Apr 2009, at 11:22, Joaquin Rivera Padron wrote: > at the moment I do it this way, hiding the complexity out of the > steps: > > Then /^I should see the people search form$/ do > people_search_form_exists > end > > Then /^I should not see the people search form$/ do > people_search_form_exists "not" > end > > and then the method: > >

Hi, I''m trying to setup a mock for my controller test but I can''t get it to recognise the mock. I use it "should find all users" do User.should_receive(:find).with( :all, :limit => 10 ).and_return([@user]) do_get end and in the controller @users = User.find(:all, :limit => 10 ) But this does not work. It gives me User expected :find with (:all)

Hi, rather than flooding this list with separate emails, I''ve been queueing up questions using rspec with rails. (an irc channel would be nice too :) Here ya go... - Is there a way to test named routes? - Could I get an example how to test an ajax request (link_to_remote)? would that go in view? and/or in controller spec? - Can you assert which layout template is rendered in a

I can''t figure out how to build rspec-rails as a gem when just cloned from github... there isn''t any .gemspec file or rake task that does this. Any help? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Hello! I''m just a caveman with some caveman questions. I''ve been parsing Rspec for quite a while, and I''m writing my first series of specs. My initial impressions are "Verbose, but understandable. Helpful and intuitive, but so much to digest." I want to congratulate the folks who are dedicating a chunk of their lives to writing this, and ask 2 caveman

Hi, I''m using a expectation like this : repository.should_receive(:add_gem).with("test.txt", :anything) When I run my spec, it fails with the following message : Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in ''MiniGemServer should add a new gem to the repository after it has been uploaded'' #<MiniGemServer::Repository:0xb11164> expected :add_gem with

Hello! I''ve just added a new cool matcher #in into my framework WatirSplash and thought that this could be integrated into RSpec directly actually if there''s any interest. WatirSplash uses Watir (or Watir-like) frameworks for testing web pages via browser. If you''re not familiar with it then here is a short example how you had to test ajax-heavy application before:

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 recently wrote a matcher for testing AR associations which allows you to specify things like: Foo.should have_many(:bars).through(:bazes) I''m pretty darned proud of it and a couple of people have suggested that I should submit it to the rspec_on_rails project. Before I go to the trouble of writing out rdoc and fully spec''ing it, I just wanted to make sure this was

I like Shoulda. Sometimes I like plain old Test::Unit. Cucumber gives me a different thought process. I''d just like to hear some thoughts on why RSpec? What does it buy me that I can''t get with Shoulda? I just can''t seem to think in RSpec. Where is there a good example of RSpec tests that will help me grasp the right path? Thanks! -- Amos King

Writing a more thought-out reply.... On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 9:16 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at apple.com> wrote: > > On Nov 12, 2013, at 7:04 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> > wrote: > > > I have some concrete use cases in testing the pass manager where it will > allow the tests of this API to be more thorough, less verbose, and easier > to

Hi experts, I picked up a copy of the rspec book and wrote some tests in spec/lib and spec/models for my Rails 2.3.8 code. I was using rspec 2.5.1, rspec-core 2.5.0, rspec-expectations 2.5.0 et. al. But I realised that the rspec-rails version I am using is meant for Rails3. Which version of rspec-rails should I use for Rails 2.3.8? Best, Radhesh -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

<font size="2">I''m working on a large Rails site and we want to move from RSpec 0.8.2 to the latest and greatest.&nbsp; So we ran the translator and yet we''re having a lot of trouble translating should_render.<br><br>I found this on the web:<br><br>We will NOT be supporting the following in the new syntax:<br>&nbsp;

Hello, I recently made a feature request with a patch for terser mocks. http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=10412&group_id=1917&atid=7480 Here are some examples with their current equivalents: the_mock.expects.foo(1,2) {|a, b| :bar} the_mock.expects.foo(1,2).returns(:bar) the_mock.expects(:foo).with(1,2) {|a, b| :bar} the_mock.expects(:foo).with(1,2).returns(:bar)

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"

I have some concrete use cases in testing the pass manager where it will allow the tests of this API to be more thorough, less verbose, and easier to maintain. I'm not claiming to be the biggest fan of some features in GoogleMock, but on the whole, I think it's better than the alternative and will allow more careful testing of C++ APIs where the interesting part is the API itself.

Hey Everyone, Is it good practice to call matchers from within matchers? Kinda like this pattern: See: http://gist.github.com/570467 -- Brian