I'm wondering what's the difference between stub and message expectation with any_number_of_times, for example: myMock = mock("mymock") myMock.stub!(:is_a?).with(MyClass).and_return(false) and myMock = mock("mymock") myMock.should_receive(:is_a?).with(MyClass).any_number_of_times.and_return(false) because is_a? may not be called at all, it just like a stub. Is my understanding correct? Is there any guide how to use stub and message expectation?
on 2010-07-13 18:32
on 2010-07-14 00:16
Ok, here is my stab at this: Since be seem to be only setting and testing bare mocks, I'd assume this is just useful to pass the mock as a stand in for some other object. So running a test: [See the code at pastie: http://pastie.org/1043160 ] I get subtly different messages: ) Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in 'mocking stub should not be ok if it gets a at least one good argument and an unexpected argument' Mock "mymock" received unexpected message :is_a? with (NoMock) ./mock_spec.rb:61: for stubs vs. ) Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in 'mocking mock should see the incorrect one and report an error' Mock "mymock" received :is_a? with unexpected arguments expected: (MyClass) got: (NoMock) ./mock_spec.rb:28: for mocks. The web page says: "Explicitly Imprecise Counts my_mock.should_receive(:msg).any_number_of_times The message can be received 0 or more times. " I can't envision a use case where this is needed, or can't be emulated via a stub. I'd be interested in David C's take or someone else's. Cheers, Ed Ed Howland http://greenprogrammer.wordpress.com http://twitter.com/ed_howland
on 2010-07-14 01:14
On Jul 13, 2010, at 11:29 AM, Benyi Wang wrote: > because is_a? may not be called at all, it just like a stub. Is my understanding correct? Yes. > Is there any guide how to use stub and message expectation? any_number_of_times was introduced before we introduced stubs, way back, way back. I use stub() rather than should_receive + any_number_of_times. HTH, David