Yes, gist is great!
Thank you very much for taking the time to look at this. I like your
suggestions very much and will use them. At this point I'm just
messing around, but I don't understand why this doesn't work.
One more bad implementation if you have time:
http://gist.github.com/2372
I'm
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:15 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:57 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:34 AM, Matt Lins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Scott Taylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:40 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:15 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:57 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:34 AM, Matt Lins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Matt Lins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:40 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:15 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 7:57 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:49 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Matt Lins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:40 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:15 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On
Fair enough. Thanks.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:53 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:49 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:44 AM, Matt Lins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 8:40 AM, David Chelimsky [EMAIL
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Matt Lins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, gist is great!
Thank you very much for taking the time to look at this. I like your
suggestions very much and will use them. At this point I'm just
messing around, but I don't understand why this doesn't work.
One
Yah, I looked around. I came out with a better understanding of
rSpec's mocking internals, but no answer to the problem.
I don't need it. I'll probably end up using FlexMock or Mocha for
future projects anyway. I'd be happy to file a ticket if you think
it's worthy of one. It was my first
Hi all,
Initially I thought this was a bug in the built-in mocking framework(and it
still may be), but I better hash it out on the mailing list before I
file/reopen the ticket:
http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/478-mocks-on-constants#ticket-478-6
I thought my example
On Jul 24, 2008, at 11:49 PM, Matt Lins wrote:
Hi all,
Initially I thought this was a bug in the built-in mocking
framework(and it still may be), but I better hash it out on the
mailing list before I file/reopen the ticket:
Scott,
Thanks, your solution does work, although I'm not sure I like it. I
like to stub out behavior in my before block but also use mock
expectations to verify behavior in my specs. Similar to what Dave
explains here:
http://blog.davidchelimsky.net/2006/11/9/tutorial-rspec-stubs-and-mocks
I
On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:21 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
Scott,
Thanks, your solution does work, although I'm not sure I like it. I
like to stub out behavior in my before block but also use mock
expectations to verify behavior in my specs. Similar to what Dave
explains here:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:32 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
I suppose the way I'm defining the stubs, differs from what Dave is
doing in his example.
I assumed that:
MyModel = mock('MyModel Class', :count = 1)
was the same as:
MyModel.stub!(:count).and_return(1)
Nope. Not even close. Here's an
On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:47 AM, Scott Taylor wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:32 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
I suppose the way I'm defining the stubs, differs from what Dave is
doing in his example.
I assumed that:
MyModel = mock('MyModel Class', :count = 1)
was the same as:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Scott Taylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:21 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
Scott,
Thanks, your solution does work, although I'm not sure I like it. I
like to stub out behavior in my before block but also use mock
expectations to verify behavior
On Jul 25, 2008, at 1:05 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:38 PM, Scott Taylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:21 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
Scott,
Thanks, your solution does work, although I'm not sure I like it. I
like to stub out behavior in my before block but
On Jul 25, 2008, at 1:15 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Scott Taylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:32 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
I suppose the way I'm defining the stubs, differs from what Dave is
doing in his example.
I assumed that:
MyModel =
On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Scott Taylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 1:15 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Scott Taylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jul 25, 2008, at 12:32 AM, Matt Lins wrote:
I suppose the way I'm defining the stubs, differs
18 matches
Mail list logo
