[Rspec-users] do we need stubbing?
lists-rspec at shopwatch.org
Thu Oct 5 00:21:06 EDT 2006
David Chelimsky wrote:
>> 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).
It seems to me that this is a big difference, even if it is only a
difference of intent, not execution. A stub is a fake object I put in
to make things work. A mock is a core part of my test/spec. Since BDD
is all about expressing intent in vocabulary, I think stubs should stay
even if they can be accomplished another way; it's like the difference
between "if" and "unless".
Time.stubs(:now).returns(Time.parse("Jan 1 1901")) is my most common
stub with Mocha/Stubba. I don't care how many times it's called, and it
isn't actually passed any arguments to verify; I'm just, well,
What's the argument for yanking stubs? Just duplicating code? Perhaps
stubs can be implemented in terms of mocks, or vice versa?
More information about the Rspec-users