Floehopper mocha

Comments and changes to this ticket

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Alex November 11th, 2010 @ 06:28 PM

  Am I wrong, or is the JMock custom action essentially the same thing as this patch?

  JMock uses 'will', I used 'runs'.

  jmock: oneOf (mangoTree).pickFruit(with(any(Collection.class))); will(addElements(mango1, mango2));

  mocha: mangoTree.expects(:pickfruit).runs{addElements(mango1, mango2)}

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Alex November 11th, 2010 @ 06:30 PM

  To add a use case, I mocked an API and was using some test data (tumblr posts: 5 normal, 4 pics, 3 quotes etc.)

  To check things were saving as they should, I needed to mock 'save' and update an external counter every time it was called.

• 

  James Mead November 11th, 2010 @ 06:48 PM

  @alex: I thought that one key difference was that you are allowing side effects to change anything, not just parameters passed into the stubbed method.

  @eydaimon: Can you post a complete example test and implementation that demonstrates what you are trying to do and I'll see if I can help. It's much easier to discuss concrete code rather than descriptions of code.

• 

  James Mead November 11th, 2010 @ 06:59 PM

  @alex: to better understand your use case, it would be helpful to see the test and the code e.g. in a Gist

• You flagged this item as spam.
  

  Alex November 11th, 2010 @ 07:42 PM

  Here's some code pulled from my tumblr-sync code.

  http://pastie.org/1290749

  I wanted to be able to get actual numbers for saves called etc. so that I could ensure my code was processing it's info properly. 'runs' seemed like a good way to approach that, and possible other situations.

• 

  James Mead November 12th, 2010 @ 11:40 AM

  @alex: can you not use the existing Mocha expectation "cardinality" methods e.g. times, at_least, at_most?

  I've had a go at an alternative version of your pastie.

• 

  James Mead November 15th, 2010 @ 10:26 PM

  @eydaimon: From what I can tell, you want to know that the LogMail#send method has been called. Is that correct? If so, can you not use the following :-

  LogMail.any_instance.expects(:send)
  

  This will give you an error along the following lines if the send method is not called :-

  not all expectations were satisfied
  unsatisfied expectations:
  - expected exactly once, not yet invoked: #<AnyInstance:LogMail>.send(any_parameters)
  

  An alternative would be to stub the LogMail.new method and return a mock :-

  log_mail = mock('log_mail')
  log_mail.expects(:send)
  LogMail.stubs(:new).returns(log_mail)
  

  I hope this helps. Cheers, James.

• 

  James Mead November 15th, 2010 @ 10:28 PM

  @alex: Did my suggestion help...?