Don't auto-configure global concepts when rspec-mocks is required

[dchelimsky]

Background: http://github.com/rspec/rspec-rails/issues#issue/114

require 'rspec-mocks' should not do any of:

• add should_receive to Object
• add should_not_receive to Object
• add stub to Object
• add double, mock, or stub methods to ExampleGroup or any the test-case class of other consuming framework

[dchelimsky]

This should only happen when RSpec::Mocks::setup is called explicitly.

[wincent]

Looking at the code now, looks like you've done a great job of compartmentalizing the "extensions to the Object namespace" and all the rest, so hopefully this won't be too painful to implement.

[wincent]

I'm wondering if something as simple as this will be close to what's need:

http://gist.github.com/462638

Breaks 4 examples, though, so currently looking into that.

[dchelimsky]

I'm about to push the fix.

[dchelimsky]

It's not quite that simple :)

[dchelimsky]

require 'rspec/mocks' does not add methods to Object or ExampleGroup

• call RSpec::Mocks::setup(self) from an example to add double(),
  mock(), and stub() methods to self, and should_receive(),
  should_not_receive(), and stub() methods to Object.
• NOTE the stub() on self is an alias for double(), whereas the stub()
  on every other object is a method stub declaration.

Closed by e8b3fde.

[wincent]

Er, if you say so ;-)

Funnily enough, I found that my "simple" solution actually does pass all specs if I remove the config.include(RSpec::Mocks::Methods) from the spec_helper.

Nice work anyway.

Cheers,
Wincent

[dchelimsky]

There was another step to this, which is that I wanted to simplify the API for the consuming framework. With the changes I made, rspec-core doesn't need to include RSpec::Mocks::ExampleMethods.

FWIW, I wasn't clear that you were working on a solution until I your comment with the gist above, at which point I was pretty much done with the work I was doing. I appreciate your efforts to contribute and don't want to waste your time when doing so, so I apologize for not making it more clear that this was in progress on my end.

Cheers,
David

[wincent]

Don't worry about it, it's not like it took me long to do my 2-line patch + feature. The only thing that matters is that the project moves forward, one way or another.

Cheers,
Wincent