On 9/5/07, Steven R. Baker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wilson Bilkovich wrote: > > On 9/5/07, Christoph Sturm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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, just > >> 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. regards chris _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
