Hi David. On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:24 PM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There was an implementation of it that didn't quite work for me in > http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/commit/45a6837 so we reverted it. I have > zero personal interest in this feature (use of which I find to be an > anti-pattern) but am open to applying a patch as long as it meets criteria > described in http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/28. >
I've read the ticket, I was hoping it would explain why you feel any_instance is an anti-pattern. In my situation I am spec'ing a library that depends upon a lower-level for network operations. I use any_instance at certain points to simulate data coming from the network. Trying to stub :new and return a mock was very problematic for me because the object involved does some work with the data which my code depends upon for it's own behaviour. Hence to test that I end up having to do a lot of work in my mocks and it quickly becomes cumbersome. What I really wanted was the "genuine" object with some behaviour changed which is what any_instance gives me. I tried searching the archives of this list but couldn't find an article where you (or anyone else) expands on this view about any_instance. And thanks for the pointer, I guess I will try and assemble the patch and see if I can make it work. Regards, Matt. -- Matt Mower :: http://matt.blogs.it/ _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
