Thanks to a pointer from lizkeogh.com site I've been discovering the joy
of the Mockito (http://mockito.org/) mocking framework for Java. It
verifies behaviour after the action. It struck me how this matched the
format I use in my Ruby cucumber features. Within Rspec if we could use
post behaviour verifications I could unify the format of my specs with
my features. Specs could look like:
---
it "should make verfication of behaviour after action"
#Given
setup some mock/stubs
#When
perform action
#Then
Check whether the behaviour was as expected.
end
---
While we can do this with output checks in Rspec we cannot do such a
thing with 'should_receive'.
Having a consistent format for specs and stories sounds like a great
idea to me.
Also the separation of the verification from the Given set-up is nice.
So I'm proposing the idea of adding 'should_have_received' and test_spy
in Rspec:
---
x = test_spy('like a mock but more into espionage')
#Action which does not fail on unexpected method but just records calls.
some.action(x)
x.should_have_received(:method).and_returned_with('some string')
---
What I'm still looking at is if the idea of post validation is possible
in the Rspec framework mocking framework. I know RR
(http://github.com/btakita/rr/tree/master) is looking at implementing
the Spy pattern which will enable this sort of testing.
Do people think this would be a good addition to Rspec?
((I'm really excited with the idea and I have started playing around
with some code for a prototype. If its not for Rspec I can always look
at it for RR.))
I've added a issue in lighthouse (though its behaving very strangely at
the moment not picking my ticket up in searches/tags)
http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/527-adding-spy-to-rspecs-mocking-framework
--
Joseph Wilk
http://www.joesniff.co.uk
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
