There is an alternate syntax that I'm using nearly exclusively at this point, which is to pass a block along with the stub() and should_receive() messages:foo.stub(:bar) { "return value" } foo.stub(:bar) { raise SomeError } foo.stub(:bar) { yield "value" } foo.stub(:bar) { throw :value } foo.should_receive(:bar) { "return value" } foo.should_receive(:bar) { raise SomeError } foo.should_receive(:bar) { yield "value" } foo.should_receive(:bar) { throw :value } As you can see, there is much less API to worry about here. You're just supplying an implementation. This approach also works with scoped arguments: input = Input.new calculator = Calculator.new(input) calculator.should_receive(:add).with(1,2) { 3 } input.type("1", "+", "2", "Enter") I've been thinking of deprecating the and_xxx methods in rspec-2. Does anybody think that's an awful idea?
It may be because my RSpec-fu is relatively immature, but I like and_return and friends. It makes sense to my brain. Admittedly, I have not used the other syntax yet, so I really should give it a go and see what I think. At the present moment, I would be very disappointed if the and_ methods went away.
-1 Peace, Phillip _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
