Deprecating the mocking framework?

[Pat Maddox]

I saw in one of Dave C.'s comments to a ticket that "our current plan
is to deprecate the mocking framework."  I hadn't heard anything about
that, but then again I haven't paid super close attention to the list.
 Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using Mocha
(or any other framework one might want to plug in?).

Pat
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[rupert-7]

> I saw in one of Dave C.'s comments to a ticket that "our current plan
> is to deprecate the mocking framework."  I hadn't heard anything about
> that, but then again I haven't paid super close attention to the list.
>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using Mocha
> (or any other framework one might want to plug in?).

The idea has been banded around on the dev list recently, see.....

http://www.nabble.com/mock-framework-tf4312137.html#a12276473

for the discussion

Cheers

Rupert


_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Tom Stuart]

On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using  
>> Mocha
> The idea has been banded around on the dev list recently

This makes me sad, because it means only one thing for the majority  
of users: more hassle. So now I have to choose a mocking framework  
too (an arbitrary choice, thus a gamble), or else configure RSpec to  
keep working the way it used to work, and watch my mocking code slide  
into obsolescence? Sigh.

I agree that it's a big win for the RSpec developers to not have to  
deal with the distraction of maintaining a mocking framework, but  
it's vaguely surprising that nobody's mentioned how valuable it is  
that RSpec is a tidy, coherent, consistent, integrated BDD tool that  
just works out of the box right now. (And newcomers still find it  
impenetrable!) It looks like it's inevitable that it'll be broken up,  
but, yeah, it's a real shame.

Cheers,
-Tom
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Peter Marklund-2]

I understand where you're coming from Tom. But it's currently two  
script/plugin installs to start using RSpec with Rails, making it be  
three (the current two plus a mocking framework) is presumably not  
going to change adoption or the hurdle of using RSpec by much. I  
currently use Mocha because I can use it both with Test::Unit and  
RSpec. I have a big legacy of Test::Unit tests and I want to be able  
to maintain those and use mocking there, with the same syntax as in  
RSpec. That's why I don't use the built in mocking in RSpec.

Peter

On Sep 1, 2007, at 11:04 AM, Tom Stuart wrote:

> On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
>>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
>>> Mocha
>> The idea has been banded around on the dev list recently
>
> This makes me sad, because it means only one thing for the majority
> of users: more hassle. So now I have to choose a mocking framework
> too (an arbitrary choice, thus a gamble), or else configure RSpec to
> keep working the way it used to work, and watch my mocking code slide
> into obsolescence? Sigh.
>
> I agree that it's a big win for the RSpec developers to not have to
> deal with the distraction of maintaining a mocking framework, but
> it's vaguely surprising that nobody's mentioned how valuable it is
> that RSpec is a tidy, coherent, consistent, integrated BDD tool that
> just works out of the box right now. (And newcomers still find it
> impenetrable!) It looks like it's inevitable that it'll be broken up,
> but, yeah, it's a real shame.
>
> Cheers,
> -Tom
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@...
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

----------------------------
Peter Marklund
Garvar Lundins Gränd 7
11220 Stockholm
Sweden

Mobile Phone: [phone]
Home Phone: [phone]
Skype: peter_marklund

IM: AIM - petermarklund, MSN - peter_marklund@..., Yahoo -  
peter_marklund2002

http://marklunds.com
----------------------------



_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Pat Maddox]

On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:

> > I saw in one of Dave C.'s comments to a ticket that "our current plan
> > is to deprecate the mocking framework."  I hadn't heard anything about
> > that, but then again I haven't paid super close attention to the list.
> >  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using Mocha
> > (or any other framework one might want to plug in?).
>
> The idea has been banded around on the dev list recently, see.....
>
> http://www.nabble.com/mock-framework-tf4312137.html#a12276473
>
> for the discussion
>
> Cheers
>
> Rupert
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@...
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

Thanks for the link.

Pat
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Wincent Colaiuta]

El 1/9/2007, a las 11:15, Peter Marklund escribió:

> I understand where you're coming from Tom. But it's currently two
> script/plugin installs to start using RSpec with Rails, making it be
> three (the current two plus a mocking framework) is presumably not
> going to change adoption or the hurdle of using RSpec by much. I
> currently use Mocha because I can use it both with Test::Unit and
> RSpec. I have a big legacy of Test::Unit tests and I want to be able
> to maintain those and use mocking there, with the same syntax as in
> RSpec. That's why I don't use the built in mocking in RSpec.

Ouch. I used the built-in RSpec mocking because it was the default  
and I figured that it would be less likely to have compatibility  
issues in the future (say when Mocha or any of the others made subtle  
updates outside the control of the RSpec team). I liked the idea of  
having one integrated package which just worked.

I actually thought the trend was in the opposite direction; to  
include things in RSpec (isn't RBehave part of trunk now?) rather  
than pare them down.

Luckily, however, I don't have too many mocks yet, and the ones which  
are there aren't that complex. Could probably convert them over to  
something else in about a day's work.

Cheers,
Wincent

_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[rupert-7]

On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:

> On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
>>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
>>> Mocha
>> The idea has been banded around on the dev list recently
>
> This makes me sad, because it means only one thing for the majority
> of users: more hassle. So now I have to choose a mocking framework
> too (an arbitrary choice, thus a gamble), or else configure RSpec to
> keep working the way it used to work, and watch my mocking code slide
> into obsolescence? Sigh.

It won't be removed, so you'll still be able to use it (as Peter  
pointed out) .  I had exactly the same initial reaction as you (mine  
was a sort of "nooooo, they can't do that") so I know where you're  
coming from. But having read through the discussion on the dev list  
and thought about it, the rspec mocking framework is pretty stable  
and complete so I don't think depreciating it is going to be too big  
a problem for those (like me!) that have a bundle of specs that use  
the rspec mocking framework - I'm going to keep using it for now, but  
have a look at the alternatives as a background task with the intent  
to use one of them on a new project as some point in the future.

Cheers

Rupert
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[OmenKing]

My question is what would you recommend for Mocking?

Mocha or FlexMock?

On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:

On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:

> On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
>>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
>>> Mocha
>> The idea has been banded around on the dev list recently
>
> This makes me sad, because it means only one thing for the majority
> of users: more hassle. So now I have to choose a mocking framework
> too (an arbitrary choice, thus a gamble), or else configure RSpec to
> keep working the way it used to work, and watch my mocking code slide
> into obsolescence? Sigh.

It won't be removed, so you'll still be able to use it (as Peter
pointed out) .  I had exactly the same initial reaction as you (mine
was a sort of "nooooo, they can't do that") so I know where you're
coming from. But having read through the discussion on the dev list
and thought about it, the rspec mocking framework is pretty stable
and complete so I don't think depreciating it is going to be too big
a problem for those (like me!) that have a bundle of specs that use
the rspec mocking framework - I'm going to keep using it for now, but
have a look at the alternatives as a background task with the intent
to use one of them on a new project as some point in the future.

Cheers

Rupert
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[rupert-7]

On 1 Sep 2007, at 18:16, Andrew WC Brown wrote:

> My question is what would you recommend for Mocking?
>
> Mocha or FlexMock?

Personally, I've not got a clue as all I've used to date is the rspec  
mocking framework.  I've had a quick look at Mocha and it seems  
pretty good, but haven't looked into FlexMock at all yet.

+1 to anyone who's used both these can comment on the differences!


_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[OmenKing]

After a quick google search:

http://www.slideshare.net/viget/mockfight-flexmock-vs-mocha

I have no problem using a external mocking framework but its the choosing.
convention over configuration.

On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:

On 1 Sep 2007, at 18:16, Andrew WC Brown wrote:

> My question is what would you recommend for Mocking?
>
> Mocha or FlexMock?

Personally, I've not got a clue as all I've used to date is the rspec
mocking framework.  I've had a quick look at Mocha and it seems
pretty good, but haven't looked into FlexMock at all yet.

+1 to anyone who's used both these can comment on the differences!


_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

--
Monsterbox Productions
putting small businesses on-line

1319 Victoria Avenue East
Thunder Bay, Ontario P7C 1C3
Canada

Andrew WC Brown
web-developer and owner
andrew@...
P: 807-626-9009
F: 807-624-2705
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[David Chelimsky-2]

On 9/1/07, Andrew WC Brown <omen.king@...> wrote:
> After a quick google search:
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/viget/mockfight-flexmock-vs-mocha

In fairness - there is something lacking in the slide set - it
suggests that mocha supports parameter matchers and flexmock does not.
In fact, flexmock does. You can do this:

mock.should_receive(:message).with(String).once

and it will pass if the mock receives the message w/ a String. In
mocha, you have to say:

mock.expects(:message).with(kind_of(String))

Flexmock compares args using ===, which is why this works implicitly.

Similarly, mocha, flexmock, and rspec can all take an argument matcher
- an object that responds to == and gives you the right answer. So,
you can do this w/ any of these frameworks:

class LessThan
  def initialize(threshold)
    @threshold = threshold
  end

  def ==(other)
    other < @threshold
  end
end

def less_than(expected)
  LessThan.new(expected)
end

mock.expects(:message).with(less_than(3))
mock.should_receive(:message).with(less_than(3))

Cheers,
David

>
> I have no problem using a external mocking framework but its the choosing.
> convention over configuration.
>
>
>
> On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:
> >
> > On 1 Sep 2007, at 18:16, Andrew WC Brown wrote:
> >
> > > My question is what would you recommend for Mocking?
> > >
> > > Mocha or FlexMock?
> >
> > Personally, I've not got a clue as all I've used to date is the rspec
> > mocking framework.  I've had a quick look at Mocha and it seems
> > pretty good, but haven't looked into FlexMock at all yet.
> >
> > +1 to anyone who's used both these can comment on the differences!
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users@...
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Monsterbox Productions
> putting small businesses on-line
>
> 1319 Victoria Avenue East
> Thunder Bay, Ontario P7C 1C3
> Canada
>
> Andrew WC Brown
> web-developer and owner
> andrew@...
> P: 807-626-9009
>  F: 807-624-2705
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@...
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Wilson Bilkovich]

On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:
>
> On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:
>
> > On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
> >>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
> >>> Mocha
> >> The idea has been bandied around on the dev list recently

This decision, if it is made in this manner, is suicide for RSpec.
I have been a huge RSpec booster, but this will make me drop it like a hot coal.
=(
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Pat Maddox]

On 9/1/07, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@...> wrote:

> On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:
> >
> > On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:
> >
> > > On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
> > >>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
> > >>> Mocha
> > >> The idea has been bandied around on the dev list recently
>
> This decision, if it is made in this manner, is suicide for RSpec.
> I have been a huge RSpec booster, but this will make me drop it like a hot coal.
> =(

While I won't drop RSpec ;) I agree that removing the mocking
framework is a mistake.

With the integration of rbehave, RSpec is a complete BDD framework.
It allows for behavior specification at the app-level and at the
object-level.  I'm sure everyone will agree that mocking is integral
to the object specification component of BDD.  To paraphrase Aslak,
"if you're not using mock objects then it ain't BDD."

I can understand not wanting to reinvent the wheel, and there are mock
frameworks that sufficiently do the job.  However the whole point of
RSpec is that we're not satisfied with "sufficient" but instead demand
a tool that works the way our brains think.  I haven't used Mocha or
Flexmock extensively because RSpec's mocking has been great for
me...but I remember taking a look at them when Mocha support was first
added to RSpec.  There were some things that RSpec's framework did
better and more clearly than Mocha.  I wish I could remember them
precisely, but it was quite a while back.  The point is, if the mock
framework feels off even a little bit, it basically defeats the
purpose of RSpec.  At the very least, it undermines it to a degree.

RSpec should keep its mocking framework because it's the only
framework that is designed with the same philosophy as RSpec.  In fact
I feel insanely strange thinking of them as separate entities.  The
best scenario, imo, is one where we have a mocking framework tightly
coupled to the overall vision of the RSpec project, but that allows
people to use something else if they really want.  I think it's
important that RSpec remain a complete BDD framework with all
necessary components working in harmony.

Pat
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Priit Tamboom]

On 9/2/07, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@...> wrote:

> On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:
> >
> > On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:
> >
> > > On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
> > >>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
> > >>> Mocha
> > >> The idea has been bandied around on the dev list recently
>
> This decision, if it is made in this manner, is suicide for RSpec.
> I have been a huge RSpec booster, but this will make me drop it like a hot coal.
> =(
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@...
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

Eh! The first reactions :-) However I also have to admit and wonder
why rspec dev didn't make this kind of decisions before version 1.0. I
hate (as a nuby) that now I have to make decision (mocka or flexmock)
at the time where I'm not even a big mock fan yet (now it's even more
harder to sell the idea to co-workers as well).

For the very first look, I prefer mocka syntax more than flexmock.

However I like rspec's clean it 'should' specs (and generating doc
from it) so much more compared to test::unit way is.

Oki,
Priit
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[David Chelimsky-2]

On 9/2/07, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@...> wrote:

> On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:
> >
> > On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:
> >
> > > On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
> > >>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
> > >>> Mocha
> > >> The idea has been bandied around on the dev list recently
>
> This decision, if it is made in this manner, is suicide for RSpec.

I simply don't understand this statement. Why is this such a big deal?
RSpec's mock framework offers pretty much ZERO over mocha or flexmock
- the only thing is that it saves you from typing 24 or 27 characters
in a config file, depending on your preference. 21 if you use RR.

After that, the functionality is pretty much the same as the other frameworks.

> I have been a huge RSpec booster, but this will make me drop it like a hot coal.

Again - I can't understand where you're coming from here. If you start
using test/unit or test/spec or any of the other bdd frameworks you'll
still need to make a decision about a mock framework.

What is the pain that you're perceiving that will come along w/ us
dumping the mock framework? Perhaps there's something we can do to
minimize that pain once we know what it is.

Cheers,
David


> =(
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@...
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Scott Taylor-6]

On Sep 2, 2007, at 12:55 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On 9/2/07, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@...> wrote:
>> On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
>>>>>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
>>>>>> Mocha
>>>>> The idea has been bandied around on the dev list recently
>>
>> This decision, if it is made in this manner, is suicide for RSpec.
>
> I simply don't understand this statement. Why is this such a big deal?
> RSpec's mock framework offers pretty much ZERO over mocha or flexmock
> - the only thing is that it saves you from typing 24 or 27 characters
> in a config file, depending on your preference. 21 if you use RR.
>
> After that, the functionality is pretty much the same as the other  
> frameworks

I'm a little confused about this discussion.  Why don't we just do  
the following:

1. Hand off the mocking/stubbing framework off to someone else.  It  
will be their project

2. Make the mocking/stubbing framework a dependency of the rspec gem

3. Make it the default (as it is now)

4. Provide clear directions for changing mocking frameworks (as we  
have now).

I thought the end goal with refactoring the mocking framework out was  
not that we shouldn't be using it, but, that we (David, Aslak, Brian,  
etc) won't have to maintain it.  Or am I missing something?

Scott



_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[OmenKing]

I think that makes sense.

Which do you recommend? Flexmock or Mocha?

On 9/2/07, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists@...> wrote:

On Sep 2, 2007, at 12:55 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On 9/2/07, Wilson Bilkovich < wilsonb@...> wrote:
>> On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
>>>>>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
>>>>>> Mocha
>>>>> The idea has been bandied around on the dev list recently
>>
>> This decision, if it is made in this manner, is suicide for RSpec.
>
> I simply don't understand this statement. Why is this such a big deal?
> RSpec's mock framework offers pretty much ZERO over mocha or flexmock
> - the only thing is that it saves you from typing 24 or 27 characters
> in a config file, depending on your preference. 21 if you use RR.
>
> After that, the functionality is pretty much the same as the other
> frameworks

I'm a little confused about this discussion.  Why don't we just do
the following:

1. Hand off the mocking/stubbing framework off to someone else.  It
will be their project

2. Make the mocking/stubbing framework a dependency of the rspec gem

3. Make it the default (as it is now)

4. Provide clear directions for changing mocking frameworks (as we
have now).

I thought the end goal with refactoring the mocking framework out was
not that we shouldn't be using it, but, that we (David, Aslak, Brian,
etc) won't have to maintain it.  Or am I missing something?

Scott



_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

--
Monsterbox Productions
putting small businesses on-line

1319 Victoria Avenue East
Thunder Bay, Ontario P7C 1C3
Canada

Andrew WC Brown
web-developer and owner
andrew@...
P: 807-626-9009
F: 807-624-2705
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[David Chelimsky-2]

On 9/2/07, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists@...> wrote:

>
> On Sep 2, 2007, at 12:55 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
> > On 9/2/07, Wilson Bilkovich <wilsonb@...> wrote:
> >> On 9/1/07, rupert <rupert_apsc@...> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 1 Sep 2007, at 10:04, Tom Stuart wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 1 Sep 2007, at 09:31, rupert wrote:
> >>>>>>  Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using
> >>>>>> Mocha
> >>>>> The idea has been bandied around on the dev list recently
> >>
> >> This decision, if it is made in this manner, is suicide for RSpec.
> >
> > I simply don't understand this statement. Why is this such a big deal?
> > RSpec's mock framework offers pretty much ZERO over mocha or flexmock
> > - the only thing is that it saves you from typing 24 or 27 characters
> > in a config file, depending on your preference. 21 if you use RR.
> >
> > After that, the functionality is pretty much the same as the other
> > frameworks
>
> I'm a little confused about this discussion.  Why don't we just do
> the following:
>
> 1. Hand off the mocking/stubbing framework off to someone else.  It
> will be their project
>
> 2. Make the mocking/stubbing framework a dependency of the rspec gem
>
> 3. Make it the default (as it is now)
>
> 4. Provide clear directions for changing mocking frameworks (as we
> have now).
>
> I thought the end goal with refactoring the mocking framework out was
> not that we shouldn't be using it, but, that we (David, Aslak, Brian,
> etc) won't have to maintain it.  Or am I missing something?

Well, it's not simply a matter of US maintaining it. It's a matter of
it being maintained at all in light of the fact that mocha and
flexmock exist. Put simply, there never should have been an rspec mock
framework.

But here we are.

In my view, we either put the thing to sleep or keep it part of rspec
and forget the whole deprecation thing. Handling it off to someone
else to maintain seems silly to me.

FWIW,
David

>
> Scott
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@...
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Scott Taylor-6]

>
> Well, it's not simply a matter of US maintaining it. It's a matter of
> it being maintained at all in light of the fact that mocha and
> flexmock exist. Put simply, there never should have been an rspec mock
> framework.
>
> But here we are.
>
> In my view, we either put the thing to sleep or keep it part of rspec
> and forget the whole deprecation thing. Handling it off to someone
> else to maintain seems silly to me.
>
> FWIW,
> David

Ah.  I had no idea.  Why was it originally created, then?  Were you  
guys not happy with mocha at the time?  I find it hard to believe  
that you were ignorant about it.

Plus - are you going to change all of rspec's specs to use flexmock  
or mocha?

Scott





_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

[Scott Taylor-6]

>
> Well, it's not simply a matter of US maintaining it. It's a matter of
> it being maintained at all in light of the fact that mocha and
> flexmock exist. Put simply, there never should have been an rspec mock
> framework.
>
> But here we are.
>
> In my view, we either put the thing to sleep or keep it part of rspec
> and forget the whole deprecation thing. Handling it off to someone
> else to maintain seems silly to me.

Just to reiterate on my last point:

There are some advantages to keeping the framework - namely that we  
won't have to convert a lot of specs.  But there are other  
advantages, too. New features are easier for us to implement for  
ourselves.  I've already had some ideas for how the mocking framework  
could become better (i.e. support for anonymous functions).  I think  
if we keep it, we should be looking to implement some of those  
advantages that the other mocking frameworks don't have.  We also  
have steam, which I don't think mocha and flexmock have (although I  
could be wrong about this).

I just took a look at flexmock - and must say that I don't like the  
"partial mock" language, because it is confusing to my brain which  
distinguishes a stub from a mock.  And mocha/stubba has an ugly  
syntax (In my humble, and inexperienced, opinion).

If you did "put the thing [rspec's mocking framework] to sleep" -  
which would you covert to - Mocha, or Flexmock?

Scott






_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users