[rspec-users] Deprecating the mocking framework?
Christopher D. Pratt
chrisdpratt at gmail.com
Thu Sep 6 09:23:58 EDT 2007
What's the rationale behind removing the integrated mocking framework? Can
you not still use Mocha or FlexMock or whatever else you'd like to use
still? Meanwhile, the integrated mocking framework in RSpec provides a ready
and able mocking framework for anyone just starting out with RSpec. In my
experience, people are more apt to begin to use a new thing if it's already
there waiting for them.
On 9/6/07, Christoph Sturm <christoph.sturm at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/5/07, Steven R. Baker <srbaker at pobox.com> wrote:
> > Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
> > > On 9/5/07, Christoph Sturm <christoph.sturm at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> One thing is clear, mocha is much nicer than the integrated mocking,
> > >> nicer syntax, better errormessages, better everything. The rspec
> > >> mocking framework could never compete with mocha or flexmock on its
> > >> own. At the time it was created there were good reasons for that,
> > >> like there are good reasons to deprecate it now.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > I would be 100% OK with this for version 1.1 or 1.2 or whatever, as
> > > long as Mocha was the only 'recommendation', and the rspec gem had a
> > > listed gem dependency on Mocha.
> > > It's the 'choice' I object to, not the specifics of which mock
> > > framework we happen to use.
> > >
> > To clarify, you just want a default mock framework, instead of being
> > forced to make the decision yourself?
> Ok, I am in no way saying anything against flexmock, Its probably
> great, but I never tried it. What I tried was rspec mocking and mocha,
> and I liked mocha much better.
> And I do think there should be a default, for the generated code.
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rspec-users