[rspec-devel] If you set an expectation on something that's already stubbed, should it return the stubbed value?

[Bryan Ray]

I think it sounds useful, but I do agree that is is not as explicit as  
I personally like.

I think it might lead to more scrolling up and down to figure out what  
is being setup in the before :each blocks to be able to understand the  
spec blocks ... which I am not a fan of.

+1/-1 (neutral) :)

On Sep 12, 2008, at 10:12 AM, Blake Watters wrote:

> +1
>
> If I approached RSpec without any existing knowledge, my assumption  
> would be that the stubbed method would return the value. Anything we  
> can do to preserve that sort of learning via discovery is a win.
>
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:44 AM, Pat Maddox <pergesu at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> Here's a pretty simple spec
>
> describe AccountService do
>  before(:each) do
>    @account = stub("account", :balance => 12345)
>    @service = AccoutnService.new
>  end
>
>  it "should check the balance" do
>    @account.should_receive(:balance)
>    @service.get_balance(@account)
>  end
> end
>
> Ignore the fact that it's totally lame :)
>
> Right now, in the example, @account.balance will return nil.  Any
> other specs that call it will get back 12345.  What do you guys think
> about making it return the same value by default, instead of nil?  So
> basically, instead of totally shadowing that method, we simply tighten
> up the constraints on the mock object by adding an expectation.
>
> Pros:
> - Less verbose - it expresses intent better, I think.  You don't
> really care what it returns in that case.  Just that it gets that
> method called, and everything works
> - No duplication.  I can't think of a single instance where I stubbed
> a call, and then in my expectation I wanted it to return nil.  I
> *always* duplicate it
>
> Cons:
> - Less verbose :)  maybe some people would think it's not explicit  
> enough?
>
> Personally, I'm all for it.  What do you guys think?
>
> Pat
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-devel/attachments/20080912/02e5f02f/attachment-0001.html>