similar to: Expect with "real world" returns?

I''m not sure if this is by design, but I''ve stumbled across this a few times trying to debug my own tests. If an assertion fails the test, and a mock expectation was to blame, the test''s failure / error messages don''t give enough info. I''ve had to resort to def teardown mocha_verify end which just gets tedious. I''ve created a patch

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.

Hello, I have a question regarding the use of Mocha with rSpec to spec one of my methods. My spec contains the following vehical1 = mock() vehical2 = mock() vehical1.stubs(:mph).returns(150) vehical2.stubs(:mph).returns(250) comparer.add_vehical([@vehical1, @vehical2]) comparer.sort_by(:mph) The comparer is an object that has a basic "stack like" functionality, add_vehical is the

Hi, I''m new to mocha and stubba but eager to learn. I have a rails functional test in which I would like to stub an instance method of particular class to always return true. I tried the following: def test_post_checkout Order.any_instance.stubs(:successful?).returns(true) post :checkout assert_response :redirect assert_equal "Checkout was successful.",

Can somebody help me understand the new syntax for replacing a return statement that returns a Proc? I''m having difficulty understanding what is meant by: "Use explicit multiple return values and/or multiple expectations instead." source: http://mocha.rubyforge.org/classes/Mocha/ Expectation.html#M000024 Here is a simple example of what I am doing: http://

Hey all, I have a question with using mocha in my tests. In the same test file, I have two tests, <code> def test_a klass.any_instance.stubs(:method_name).returns("something") klass.new.method_name ... end def test_b ... klass.new.method_name ... end </code> where klass is some class when the tests run, test _a passes, but test_b had an error like this:

i''m having problem with a form_for situation where i''m trying to DRY out the repeated parts of my forms and put them in common/form and render the form elements via another partial in controller_name/_form. Here''s the first form # app/views/common/form <% form_for ... do |f| -%> <%= render :partial => "params[:controller]/form", :object => f

I recently needed the behavior of my object to change on subsequent method calls so I added the syntax above. Here''s the diff of changes I made: Index: test/mocha/expectation_test.rb =================================================================== --- test/mocha/expectation_test.rb (revision 854) +++ test/mocha/expectation_test.rb (working copy) @@ -95,6 +95,12 @@

Hello! I''m new to Mocha and through experimentation I found out something that is not explicitly stated in the documentation: If you need to mock the same function call with different parameters and results, you can set the scope of expectations with a begin ... end block. I also made up an example on how to expect more than one function call with different parameters and return values.

Hi, I thought I had a handle on the whole singleton class thing but now I''m not too sure. I have a class definition: class ValidationMaster def validate(params) # complex and time consuming validation # returns true on success, raises Exception # on failure end end Okay, so when I''m running my functional tests within rails, I want to be able to control how

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)

In most of my tests I''d like to be able to stub out the observers for my models, but I''m not sure the best way to do this. I doesn''t look like there is a way to stub all instance methods, and I don''t seem to be able to stub early enough to stub out the observer as it''s instantiated. I can think of several hackish ways to get around it, but I was

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

On my current project I needed to create a stub that responded correctly to the id message. Here''s the change I put into my copy of head. Index: lib/mocha/mock_methods.rb =================================================================== --- lib/mocha/mock_methods.rb (revision 1114) +++ lib/mocha/mock_methods.rb (working copy) @@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ method_names =

Hi folks. So I''m using mocha on a ruby project, and I really like it. One thing I''ve noticed is that it can be a bit "surprising" when I''m mocking methods that don''t exist on an object, and I think there''s an easyish fix. At the moment, you use sheep = mock() to create a mock sheep. What I''d like to do is something like sheep =

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

I''m not sure if someone has already addressed this issue, but if not, here goes. I need the following behavior: def test_generate(documentation = ''/test_documentation/'', destination = ''/destination/'') yield_results = [''/'', ''filename.yaml'', ''blah.xml'']

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

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