On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 10:07 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelim...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:52 AM, J. B. Rainsberger <m...@jbrains.ca> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Bas Vodde <b...@odd-e.com> wrote: > >> > >> > >> JB is right. > >> > >> Sometimes, for clarity, it is useful to add should_not, but for > >> functionality it is usually not needed. > > > > > > I know JMock has never() for this people. Should RSpec-mocks have > something > > like object.should_receive(:nothing). > > never() is not a catch all for _all_ messages. It is for a specific > message, just like it is in rspec-mocks > > # rspec > object.should_receive(:msg).never > > #jmock > never(object).msg() > In JMock, you can write this: never(object); and this means "never anything". Just like ignoring(object); allowing(object); which each equate to mock().as_null_object(). -- J. B. (Joe) Rainsberger :: http://www.jbrains.ca :: http://blog.thecodewhisperer.com Author, JUnit Recipes Free Your Mind to Do Great Work :: http://www.freeyourmind-dogreatwork.com
_______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
