[rspec-users] spec'ing calls to super (or other Ruby keywords)
John D. Hume
duelin.markers at gmail.com
Sat May 3 10:49:11 EDT 2008
I believe calls to super are sufficiently internal to the Ruby interpreter
that a mocking framework can't intercept them without doing separate
implementations for separate Ruby interpreters (and likely even separate
versions). I could be wrong, but even so I'd recommend a different
If your need is really as simple as your example, what you have is just a
method that has to get two things done: the base save and one additional
call. You can write one (or more) example for each of those two things
without your spec knowing that one of those things gets done by calling
super. (You might object that by spec'ing the base #save behavior you're
spec'ing the framework. I'd say you're USING the framework to spec
something your code does. To be clear, I'm not suggesting you spec every
detail of what save does: just something to make sure the record actually
lands in the db.)
(Sidebar: Keep in mind the return value if you're really overriding #save
If you're dead set on spec'ing that the super method gets called, there are
a couple of hideous ways of doing it that will leak out of your example.
Namely, you can (in your spec) redefine the method in the superclass and
verify it gets called or (also in your spec, and this one's a little less
leaky) have the class under test include a module that defines the same
method and verify it gets called. Don't do either of those though (unless
it's just to prove to yourself that they're possible).
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Matt McNeil <nabble.108 at xoxy.net> wrote:
> Hi there,
> How does one spec an invocation of a Ruby keyword, such as super in this
> class User < ActiveResource::Base
> # faking the ActiveRecord before/after_save observers
> def save
> UserMailer.deliver_activation(self) if recently_activated?
> Does the solution look anything like the following?
> describe User do
> describe '#save' do
> it "should call save on the parent class" do
> # something.should_receive(:something)
> Any thoughts?
> Thanks much,
> View this message in context:
> Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rspec-users