[rspec-devel] [Rspec-users] do we need stubbing?

Brian Takita brian.takita at gmail.com
Wed Oct 4 21:55:08 EDT 2006


>
> Also, stub! is a method of Object. If we where to replace it with partial
> mocking, we would have to move partial mocking to Object to replace this
> behaviour.


Unless things have changed, partial mocking is a feature of Module objects.


On 10/4/06, Brian Takita <brian.takita at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I like the Object#stub! method because it's syntax is more focused and
> clearer than using a mock for the purpose of stubbing a method.
>
> obj.stub!(:foobar).with(true)
> vs.
> obj.should_receive(:foobar).and_return(true).any_number_of_times
>
> The stub method also communicates my intention to stub out the method,
> just as mocking the method communicates my intention to verify that a
> certain message was passed to the object. I believe this makes my
> tests/specs clearer.
>
> Also, stub! is a method of Object. If we where to replace it with partial
> mocking, we would have to move partial mocking to Object to replace this
> behaviour.
>
> On 10/4/06, aslak hellesoy <aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/4/06, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hey all -
> > >
> > > The trunk currently supports three types of mocking/stubbing:
> > >
> > > Mock Objects (created dynamically at runtime)
> > > Partial Mocking of methods on existing classes
> > > Stubbing of methods on existing objects or classes
> > >
> > > The main difference between Partial Mocking and Stubbing is that Stubs
> > > don't verify.
> > >
> > > I'm wondering if we really need the stubbing facility at all, given
> > > that we can do the same thing using Partial Mocks. If we decided to
> > > yank the Stubs, we could add Partial Mocks support to objects (right
> > > now it only works on classes).
> > >
> >
> > Sounds good to me.
> >
> > Just to be precise - one or more methods could be mocked on an
> > individual *Object* (Class is an Object). So this would work for any
> > Object, not just Class. Right?
> >
> > I don't see a lot of value in stubbing without verification if partial
> > mocking (or should we call it "object method mocking" to be more
> > precise?) can be used on *any* object.
> >
> > > Note that this functionality is not part of a release yet, so any such
> >
> > > changes would only affect the brave trunk-dwellers among you.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts on this? Can anyone explain to me why stubs are useful in
> > > addition to partial mocks?
> > >
> >
> > I can't think of a compelling reason.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Aslak
> >
> > > David
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Rspec-users mailing list
> > > Rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-devel mailing list
> > rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-devel/attachments/20061004/207f8d31/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the rspec-devel mailing list