[rspec-users] Mocks: expectations vs spying
matt at mattwynne.net
Tue Oct 21 11:41:29 EDT 2008
So if I want to have a spec suite which uses a combination of mocking
frameworks, is this possible?
Maybe if some of the files include ../not_a_mock_spec_helper and the
others include ../default_spec_helper and then both those files
require some common spec_helper file?
On 21 Oct 2008, at 14:47, David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 2:03 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net>
>> On 19 Oct 2008, at 21:18, Ashley Moran wrote:
>>> On Oct 19, 2008, at 9:32 am, Matt Wynne wrote:
>>>>>  http://notahat.com/not_a_mock
>>>> Looks sweet - it will be in my first mock on Monday!
>> Thinking about it - how do you use multiple mocking frameworks in a
>> Is it safe to re-open a Spec::Runner.configure do |config| block at
>> the top
>> of an individual spec after I've loaded spec_helper (which will
>> have to be
>> configured to use the default rspec mocking that 90% of the project
> Not really. The problem is that examples are stored for evaluation
> later, whereas the configuration is evaluated right away.
> The reason rspec won't support using multiple mock frameworks is rspec
> mocks and mocha both extend Object (to support mock behaviour on real
> objects) and they use the same methods to create instances of mocks.
> I think that if we wanted to support multiple mock frameworks, all of
> the frameworks would have to offer an explicit mode where you could
> extend objects to behave like mocks but would have to do so explicitly
> for each object. Flexmock already works this way.
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
More information about the rspec-users