similar to: Mocking protected/private methods

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

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!

Hello, I'm attempting to migrate from an existing dovecot .99 install to dovecot 1.0.rc15 on a fresh up to date CentOs 5.1. I'm not sure what's causing this permissions error on startup - I've tried 777,644, and 600 chmods but it's always this same error: Feb 1 12:43:05 ns2 dovecot: Dovecot v1.0.rc15 starting up Feb 1 12:43:06 ns2 dovecot: Auth process died too early -

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''d like to create expectations on just portions of the arguments a function takes. For example, I want to verify that the a certain ActiveRecord association extension adds an order clause to the find options hash. Currently I simply check the entire argument structure, something like this def test_referring_journals_should_order_by_citation_count article =

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

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

Hi, Are there any docs for combining parameter matchers, or some way to define optional parameters? I''m trying to match something like: .find( 42 ) || .find( 42, {:conditions=>nil,:includes=>nil} ) Or for that matter, 42 followed by nothing or anything... Halp? I''ve tried different nested combos with any_of/all_of/anything, but getting lost trying. --Andrew

We''re using Mocha stubs to stub out a slow-performing network request in a Test::Unit class. But naturally, we don''t want to stub it out in the few tests that actually verify the functionality of that network request. Is there a way to do the stub in "setup", but override it for the few tests that need the original functionality? (I realize that in this case, the

A number of people have had difficulties subscribing and/or sending messages to the existing mailing list. Also I have to spend quite a bit of time moderating spam and the mailman interface is pretty clunky. So I was contemplating setting a Google Group up instead. Does anyone have any objections? -- James. http://blog.floehopper.org http://tumble.floehopper.org

Has anybody been using Mocha trunk over the last month or two? I''ve done quite a bit of internal refactoring and wondered whether anyone had any problems. There are also a bunch of new features e.g. states, sequences, extra parameter matchers & configurable warnings, but these are not documented in the on-line rdoc. I wondered if anyone has been looking at the rdoc in trunk and

We''ve been working with the ParameterMatchers (so cool!) but I don''t see a way to insure a method is called with no arguments. I imagined something like: user = mock(''User'') user.expects(:friends).with(nothing) Anyone run into this?

Hello, I have a problem with samba-3xx (All beta and rc versions) concerning the visibility in the "Add Printer Wizard" on windows clients. Printing works fine but that's not the problem, the problem is the visibilty of the printers defined in smb.conf in the "Add Printer Wizard". Steps: Start -> Settings -> Printers -> "Double Click Add Printer" Screen

Hello James et al. I try to set only one expectation per test, but I also dislike having extra stub declarations that are no longer used, thus I often find myself wanting Object.expects(:foo).at_least_once. That works, but I don''t actually "expect" foo to be called, in fact, I don''t care, I only want to know when it isn''t called so I can remember to

Did any further discussion ever come of this? I take it is officially not supported currently? I just get an odd error when I try it (it throws a "0 expected 1 received", no matter what stubbing/expectation combo I use), so came looking around on google, and finally the mailinglist. Here''s my stripped down example: http://pastie.caboo.se/145603 (it fails with expects too)

Hi Guys! I just joined this list after James helped me out in ruby-talk to mock a http get request for a project I have running :) Now comes the second question... I was fiddling around, making the mocking with the get request work (which turned out to me pretty easy), but then I ran into another problem. I was faced with mocking the post request, so I thought I could do it the same way

Folks- With Rails 2.0.2, I''m seeing mocha failures where they did not fail with Rails 2.0.1 test_set_to_process_fail_in_transaction(FileRecordTest): NoMethodError: undefined method `ord'' for 63:Fixnum /home/wolpert/svn/rubylms/vendor/plugins/mocha/lib/mocha/class_method.rb:45:in `hidden_method''

How can I safely mock a singleton without the mocked method living on outside the scope of the test method? I''ve run into this problem with mocking methods on globals (gasp!) in the past by doing something like def mock_my_global original = $my_global $my_global.expects(:foo).returns(''bar'') yield $my_global = original end Is there something similar I

Seems like I do a fair amount of mocking ActiveRecord''s automatically generated routines when I''m testing controllers. Things like: @portalspace = PortalSpace.new :public_readable => true, :public_writable => true, :name => ''public'' @portalspace.stubs(:id).returns(203) PortalSpace.stubs(:find).with(203).returns(@portalspace)

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.