Implement and_wrap_original #762
Conversation
|
Thanks, @JonRowe, I plan to review this in the morning. |
| # | ||
| # @example | ||
| # | ||
| # expect(api).to receive(:large_list).and_wrap_original do |original_method| |
myronmarston
Aug 21, 2014
Member
Would be good for this to show that the block receives the method args and a block (if there is one).
Would be good for this to show that the block receives the method args and a block (if there is one).
| end | ||
|
|
||
| # Tells the object to delegate to the supplied block but passing the | ||
| # original unmodified method for your use. |
myronmarston
Aug 21, 2014
Member
This is accurate but I think the use case is more clear with something like:
# Decorates the stubbed method with the supplied block. The original method
# is passed to the block as the first argument (before any method call args) so
# that you can delegate to it while being able to change what args are passed to
# it and/or mutate the return value.
This is accurate but I think the use case is more clear with something like:
# Decorates the stubbed method with the supplied block. The original method
# is passed to the block as the first argument (before any method call args) so
# that you can delegate to it while being able to change what args are passed to
# it and/or mutate the return value.
|
The implementation looks great. I agree that it needs to have specs/cukes fleshed out more and it needs a changelog entry. |
|
Ping, added some specs and a feature. |
| Feature: Wrapping the original implementation | ||
|
|
||
| Use `and_wrap_original` to make a partial double response as it normally would. This can | ||
| be useful when you want to expect a message without interfering with how it responds. You |
myronmarston
Aug 21, 2014
Member
These sentences are confusing and inaccurate. It doesn't make it respond as it normally does...it makes it respond with whatever your block does (but your block has easy access to the original method). You use and_wrap_original (over and_call_original) specifically because you want to interfere with how it responds.
These sentences are confusing and inaccurate. It doesn't make it respond as it normally does...it makes it respond with whatever your block does (but your block has easy access to the original method). You use and_wrap_original (over and_call_original) specifically because you want to interfere with how it responds.
JonRowe
Aug 23, 2014
Author
Member
I knew I forgot to change something :P
I knew I forgot to change something :P
| }.to change { instance.results.size }.from(100).to(10) | ||
| end | ||
|
|
||
| it "will raise a name error if the method does not exist" do |
myronmarston
Aug 21, 2014
Member
s/will raise/raises/
s/will raise/raises/
| value = nil | ||
| allow(instance).to receive(:results).and_wrap_original { |m| value = m } | ||
| instance.results | ||
| expect(value).to be_a Method |
myronmarston
Aug 21, 2014
Member
You could make this expectation stronger:
original_method = instance.method(:results)
allow(instance).to receive(:results).and_wrap_original { |m| value = m }
instance.results
expect(value).to eq(original_method)
You could make this expectation stronger:
original_method = instance.method(:results)
allow(instance).to receive(:results).and_wrap_original { |m| value = m }
instance.results
expect(value).to eq(original_method)| expect(value).to eq block | ||
| end | ||
|
|
||
| it "will ignore previous stubs" do |
myronmarston
Aug 21, 2014
Member
s/will ignore/ignores/
s/will ignore/ignores/
| allow(instance).to receive(:results) { "results" } | ||
| allow(instance).to receive(:results).and_wrap_original { |m| m.call } | ||
| expect(instance.results).to_not eq "results" | ||
| end |
myronmarston
Aug 21, 2014
Member
Is it worth adding a spec showing how with can be used to still specify a canned response for specific arguments, like the cuke has?
Is it worth adding a spec showing how with can be used to still specify a canned response for specific arguments, like the cuke has?
| @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ | |||
| require 'delegate' | |||
myronmarston
Aug 21, 2014
Member
Why are you requiring this?
Why are you requiring this?
JonRowe
force-pushed the
and_wrap_original
branch
3 times, most recently
from
51c4a05
to
cb284c5
|
@myronmarston I addressed your feedback, waiting for travis though |
|
Needs a changelog, then merge away once green. |
[skip ci]
This probably needs more specs and needs features but this converts
and_call_originalintoand_wrap_originalthen usesand_wrap_originalto implement the oldand_call_original(thus nicely proving it works!).Closes #650.