similar to: How to mock a model method for unit tests?

So far I''ve been doing my controller testing against "real" (testing) objects; however, I''ve been beginning to wonder if I should "default" to using mocks in most cases -- both for performence and to enforce a looser coupling. In part this is driven by my viewpoint that rail''s "functional" tests are still "unit" tests, so they

What is the appropriate way to stub out (and put an expectation on Object#__send__), without getting warnings from the Rspec mock library? Scott

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!

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

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

Am I correct in thinking that it''s not currently possible to have a method that creates a ''standard'' mock (i.e. a mock that has defaults useful in all contexts)? I''ve tried with the mock method and also by manually creating new Mock instances. I get failures when setting up expectations (undefined method ''receive'' for proc). Chris

Hi all - there''s a patch I need to apply from a ticket: http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/8798 The ticket appears to be stalled on the lack of a test case. I figured I''d just whip one up, but because it''s an Active Resource thing, and the test case would need to do ModelName.find(:all), I''d need to either mock the network connection or set one up. In this

There is one annoyance I''m encountering with the Mock API in rSpec. Overall it works well, as far as dynamic mocks go ;)... but there''s this one thing... It doesn''t allow overriding of expectations. example: m = mock("blah") m.should_receive(:one).any_number_of_times().and_return(1) m.should_receive(:one).and_return(1) The second call to should_receive

Hi In light of the fact that RSpec mocks are going into maintenance mode in the near future, I was wondering what everyone was switching to. I liked the look of FlexMock most, so gave that a shot. However, there''s a few things that don''t work well with RSpec due to the traditional differences in the way Test::Unit cases are written vs RSpec specs. (One spec per

Hi guys, Would you mind if I ask how Flex Mock and Mocha sit together? They compete directly? I read that Flex Mock was built into Rails 1.2. Is there a reason to use Mocha instead of Flex Mock? Tks Greg

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)

I wrote a simple summary of Mocks with RSpec as an answer to a discussion on our local Ruby users group. I was wondering if people here could review it, adding comments for any corrections or other important ideas regarding mocks and RSpec. You can find the article here: http://blog.showcase60.com/2007/12/13/rspec-mocks Thanks

Hi I''ve been doing this a while now. If I have a class that responds to : [], and all I''m interested in stubbing is that method, then instead of using a mock I just create a hash. (Similarly, you could create an array when you are testing an Enumerable object.) Example from code I just worked on, where uses MigrationGraph#[] looks up graph vertices by name:

I''ve just started doing TDD/BDD and like the idea of mocks. So I set out to use them. The doc pages seem great, I setup the mock and then it just works. Here is what I am trying to do: Myuser is a non-rails model of user attributes. We are going to be mocking the connection to the ldap server. The user class has a login method that connects to the ldap server and if successful,

Hi all, Initially I thought this was a bug in the built-in mocking framework(and it still may be), but I better hash it out on the mailing list before I file/reopen the ticket: http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/478-mocks-on-constants#ticket-478-6 I thought my example illustrated my problem, but obviously I was passing the wrong arguments to the mock. I revised my example to

Is it possible for me to use Mock objects in manual testing? They work great for functional testing, but now I need to load the pages and play around with some stuff, but of course I cant load them because there are a number of classes without implementations, which I want to just mock out. Any ideas? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Find the home of your dreams

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

I''m having a problems mocking successive return values. I don''t know if I''m doing something wrong or if this is a limitation of rspec mocks. Any ideas of what I may be doing wrong? I''m trying to test the generate_quote_number method. It generates a quote number, looks to see if it is in the db already. If it is, it calls itself to try again. I want

Some of my tests use ActiveResource HttpMock requests and some of them do not. Does anyone know if there is a way to disable the HttpMocks after they have already been loaded? The method ActiveResource::HttpMock.reset! only removes all the objects, but ActiveResource still thinks it should look for mock requests rather than actually making requests. I hope this makes sense! Thanks, Tom --

I wrote a plugin [1] a while ago that lets me do validations on a single AR instance. Instead of defining validations in an AR class, I can define them on a AR instance''s singleton class: class << @video validates_presence_of :title end One of my specs mocks Video.find, and the above code is run on the mock object. When I run the spec, I get the expected undefined method