Pass the instance to any instance stubs. #351

fables-tales · 2013-07-07T12:15:51Z

Related to #175

This passes the instance for stubs, I'm not sure what to do for expectations: passing the instance breaks with. I'm going to continue to fiddle but wanted to get this out early to get feedback :)

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

coveralls · 2013-07-07T12:17:54Z

Changes Unknown when pulling 6287f7a on samphippen:pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs into * on rspec:master*.

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

fables-tales · 2013-07-07T12:34:38Z

Now passes to should receive expectations too :)

coveralls · 2013-07-07T12:36:29Z

Changes Unknown when pulling a37e021 on samphippen:pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs into * on rspec:master*.

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

coveralls · 2013-07-07T12:43:08Z

Changes Unknown when pulling 4cb7c1a on samphippen:pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs into * on rspec:master*.

myronmarston · 2013-07-09T05:41:38Z

lib/rspec/mocks/configuration.rb

+
+      def pass_instance_to_any_instance_stubs=(arg)
+        @pass_instance_to_any_instance_stubs = arg
+      end


I think yield_instance_from_any_instance_implementation_blocks is a better name. What do you think?

myronmarston · 2013-07-09T05:50:53Z

This is a good start, but I think there's a simpler way to implement this:

Update MessageExpectation#initialize to store @method_double.object in an instance variable. (Or consider storing the method double itself, and changing the message reader to delegate to method_double.method_name). Either way, the point is to make MessageExpectation able to add the object instance to the yielded args as needed.
Add a method to the MessageExpectation fluent interface that instructs it to include the object instance in the yielded args. (Maybe something like yield_receiver_to_implementation_block?)
Change ExpectationChain#create_message_expectation_on to call yield_receiver_to_implementation_block if the config option is set. This removes the need for the hash munging and the if/else there.
Add the object instance to the front of the list of args passed to the inner_implementation_action block (I'll leave it to you to decide how to do that; there are a few ways to do so).

I haven't worked out all the details of this alternate implementation, but it feels cleaner to me intuitively. Among other things, the code you added to matches? can be removed, as it doesn't feel like it belongs there. Thoughts?

myronmarston · 2013-07-09T05:55:43Z

spec/rspec/mocks/any_instance_spec.rb

+
+          after(:each) do
+            RSpec::Mocks.configuration.pass_instance_to_any_instance_stubs = @orig_pass
+          end


Rather than putting this here, what do you think about creating a with isolated configuration shared context? To me, isolating configuration seems like a cross-cutting concern we'll want to use elsewhere. Also, I recommend managing the isolation of the configuration by making that shared example group clear the RSpec::Mocks::Configuration instance -- that way, it isolates any config change, as opposed to just this one config option. Thoughts?

myronmarston · 2013-07-09T06:13:02Z

What do you think about making the config option default to to true in RSpec 3? I consider it an oversite that we didn't yield the instance to begin with. If we default to false and a user needs the instance in an implementation block, they'll need to change the config option to enable this feature, and then deal with the specs that breaks, and then they'll get to do what they wanted to do in the first place. It seems like a better default to have it set to true, and then there's no migration pain when the user needs this.

For the 2.x => 3.0 upgrade, we can backport this to 2.99, with it defaulted to false there, and with logic that prints a deprecation warning if the user passes an implementation block to any_instance, instructing them to set the option explicitly to false (so they can upgrade to 3.0 w/o a problem).

Thoughts?

JonRowe · 2013-07-11T10:58:30Z

I like @myronmarston's plan, but won't it force most people to have to deal with this on upgrade?

myronmarston · 2013-07-11T12:10:31Z

It'll only force those that use a block implementation with any_instance to do so. My impression is that that's not most users.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 11, 2013, at 3:58 AM, Jon Rowe notifications@github.com wrote:

I like @myronmarston's plan, but won't it force most people to have to deal with this on upgrade?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

…com/samphippen/rspec-mocks into pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs

fables-tales · 2013-07-14T18:08:09Z

@myronmarston with with do you think users should have to specify the instance is going to come in, or not? If not should I implicitly add the object to the argument matcher, or do something else?

edit: I was asking because I was having trouble getting my implementation working. This can be disregarded now unless you feel strongly against what I've implemented.

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

coveralls · 2013-07-14T19:28:24Z

Coverage remained the same when pulling cf5ef39 on samphippen:pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs into 638d3ff on rspec:master.

coveralls · 2013-07-14T19:30:57Z

Coverage decreased (-0%) when pulling cf5ef39 on samphippen:pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs into 638d3ff on rspec:master.

myronmarston · 2013-07-15T06:40:44Z

spec/spec_helper.rb

+  after do
+    RSpec::Mocks.instance_variable_set(:@configuration, orig_configuration)
+  end
+end


honestly, I'd probably just set it to nil in a before hook:

shared_context "with isolated configuration" do before { RSpec::Mocks.instance_variable_set(:@configuration, nil) } end

I think that's all you need, since the config is lazily initialized.

Actually, scratch that. I wasn't thinking about the fact that we may want to change the config for our tests. Setting it to nil will blow those away. So nevermind.

myronmarston · 2013-07-15T06:46:49Z

lib/rspec/mocks/proxy.rb

          stub.invoke(nil, *args, &block)
        elsif expectation
+          if expectation.yield_receiver_to_implementation
+            args.unshift(expectation.orig_object)
+          end


This doesn't feel like it belongs in mocks/proxy.rb. Notice that you are asking expectation something and then doing something with expectation.orig_object. This is all knowledge that should be internal to MessageExpectation. (And same with the stub code above).

myronmarston · 2013-07-15T06:52:11Z

@myronmarston with with do you think users should have to specify the instance is going to come in, or not? If not should I implicitly add the object to the argument matcher, or do something else?

with has absolutely nothing to do with this feature. with is about what arguments are passed by the caller with the message to the receiver. It is not about what the args yielded to the implementation block are. Those are two entirely different things.

I think your concern here goes away once you move the args.unshift bit out of Proxy and into MessageExpectation.

BTW, we should make sure this doesn't interfere with and_call_original -- the receiver should not be passed through as an arg to that.

JonRowe · 2013-07-15T07:56:20Z

spec/rspec/mocks/with_isolated_configuration_spec.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+require 'spec_helper'
+require 'pry'


I don't think you meant to leave this in ;)

…ions. Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

fables-tales · 2013-07-18T12:21:10Z

@myronmarston I'm ok with defaulting this to true in 3.0 with the deprecation warning. Do you have any more code review on this implementation?

myronmarston · 2013-07-18T16:38:46Z

lib/rspec/mocks/message_expectation.rb

@@ -173,6 +186,10 @@ def matches?(message, *args)

      # @private
      def invoke(parent_stub, *args, &block)
+        if yield_receiver_to_implementation_block?
+          args.unshift(orig_object)
+        end


One issue with doing it here is that this will caused the received to be passed to any message expectation implementation, not just a block implementation. For example, this will cause an extra arg to be passed when SomeClass.any_instance.should_receive(:foo).and_call_original is used, which will break things, I think. I think you may want to wrap inner_implementation_action w/ a proc that unshifts the args, and then forwards it on to the original proc. Thoughts?

myronmarston · 2013-07-18T16:39:36Z

I'm ok with defaulting this to true in 3.0 with the deprecation warning.

Let's go with that then. If nothing else, changing it to true here should reveal if this breaks anything (such as and_call_original, as I suspect it will).

coveralls · 2013-07-19T18:13:05Z

Coverage remained the same when pulling 7feb8a1 on samphippen:pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs into 6770f2f on rspec:master.

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

fables-tales · 2013-07-25T15:53:00Z

@myronmarston I made this the default, all the specs/cukes pass. I specifically wrote a spec to deal with and_call_original which seems to be passing. (not in the most recent commit)

coveralls · 2013-07-25T15:55:45Z

Coverage decreased (-0%) when pulling 7293bfa on samphippen:pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs into 6770f2f on rspec:master.

myronmarston · 2013-07-25T16:48:19Z

lib/rspec/mocks/configuration.rb

+        @yield_instance_from_any_instance_implementation_blocks = true
+      end
+
+      attr_accessor :yield_instance_from_any_instance_implementation_blocks


It would be nice if this was a predicate, so that it's clear that it's a query message that returns true/false rather than a command method (the fact that it starts with yield_... makes it sound like a command).

On MessageExpectation, you phrased it as yield_receiver_to_implementation, so for consistency, I'm thinking this should be yield_receiver_to_any_instance_implementation_blocks= and yield_receiver_to_any_instance_implementation_blocks?. I like using the word receiver for the object (rather than using instance twice in the name), and it's more accurate to say the receiver is yielded to the block rather than from the block.

myronmarston · 2013-07-25T16:49:45Z

Well done, @samphippen! I left a comment about the naming of the config option but this needs a changelog entry, but otherwise it's good to go.

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

coveralls · 2013-07-25T22:45:47Z

Coverage decreased (-0%) when pulling a4f908f on samphippen:pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs into 6770f2f on rspec:master.

fables-tales · 2013-07-26T11:44:17Z

I'm going to go ahead and merge this, then (later today) squash this for 2-99 and turn the option off by default and make it issue a deprecation warning.

…-stubs Pass the instance to any instance stubs.

Pass the instance to any instance stubs.

6287f7a

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

Pass the instance to should_receive matchers on any instance too.

a37e021

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

Remove the unused ignore_instance parameter.

4cb7c1a

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

myronmarston reviewed Jul 9, 2013
View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs' of https://github.…

e3d825a

…com/samphippen/rspec-mocks into pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs

Simpler implementation of yielding args for any instance calls.

95476b1

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

myronmarston reviewed Jul 15, 2013
View reviewed changes

JonRowe reviewed Jul 15, 2013
View reviewed changes

Sam Phippen added 2 commits July 18, 2013 13:19

Refine the any_instance passing implementation as per myron's suggest…

7be6505

…ions. Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

Remove the with isolated configuration spec.

7feb8a1

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

myronmarston reviewed Jul 18, 2013
View reviewed changes

Turn on yielding to any_instance by default and fix config handling.

7293bfa

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

myronmarston reviewed Jul 25, 2013
View reviewed changes

Sam Phippen added 2 commits July 25, 2013 23:41

Use any instance yield names myron suggested.

c104d49

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

Add a changelog entry for rspec#351.

a4f908f

Signed-off-by: Sam Phippen <samphippen@googlemail.com>

fables-tales pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2013

Merge pull request #351 from samphippen/pass-instance-to-any-instance…

ad3bf96

…-stubs Pass the instance to any instance stubs.

fables-tales merged commit ad3bf96 into rspec:master Jul 26, 2013

fables-tales deleted the pass-instance-to-any-instance-stubs branch July 26, 2013 11:45

yujinakayama mentioned this pull request Dec 4, 2013

Support conversion of any_instance block yujinakayama/transpec#31

Closed

myronmarston mentioned this pull request Aug 11, 2017

Stubbing by a precondition #1175

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Pass the instance to any instance stubs. #351

Pass the instance to any instance stubs. #351

fables-tales commented Jul 7, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 7, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 7, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 7, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 7, 2013

myronmarston Jul 9, 2013

myronmarston commented Jul 9, 2013

myronmarston Jul 9, 2013

myronmarston commented Jul 9, 2013

JonRowe commented Jul 11, 2013

myronmarston commented Jul 11, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 14, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 14, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 14, 2013

myronmarston Jul 15, 2013

myronmarston Jul 15, 2013

myronmarston Jul 15, 2013

myronmarston commented Jul 15, 2013

JonRowe Jul 15, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 18, 2013

myronmarston Jul 18, 2013

myronmarston commented Jul 18, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 19, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 25, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 25, 2013

myronmarston Jul 25, 2013

myronmarston commented Jul 25, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 25, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 26, 2013

Pass the instance to any instance stubs. #351

Pass the instance to any instance stubs. #351

Conversation

fables-tales commented Jul 7, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 7, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 7, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 7, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 7, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

myronmarston commented Jul 9, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

myronmarston commented Jul 9, 2013

JonRowe commented Jul 11, 2013

myronmarston commented Jul 11, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 14, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 14, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 14, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

myronmarston commented Jul 15, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

fables-tales commented Jul 18, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

myronmarston commented Jul 18, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 19, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 25, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 25, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

myronmarston commented Jul 25, 2013

coveralls commented Jul 25, 2013

fables-tales commented Jul 26, 2013