Add support for spying on concrete objects #77

[twicksell]

First attempt at supporting spying of concrete objects.

[leonard84]

Hi @twicksell, thank you for your PR. However, there are some issues:

First, it doesn't work with the Specs own methods

  def "can spy on instances"() {
    given:
    Person person = new Person()
    Person spy = Spy(person)

    when:
    spy.work()

    then:
    1 * spy.work()
  }

This fails with a groovy.lang.MissingMethodException since you didn't extend org.spockframework.lang.SpecInternals with the necessary methods.

Furthermore, the Spring xml config should be on par with the DetachedMockFactory. So you'd need to extend the spock.xsd, org.spockframework.spring.xml.MockBeanDefinitionParser, and org.spockframework.spring.xml.SpockMockFactoryBean.

[leonard84]

Shouldn't it be either ref or class, what happens if the class does not match the actual class of the bean?

[twicksell]

Ref is given priority. I'd love to be able to better specify this in the xsd but can't really. I could be more explicit with startup errors if you prefer and just fail fast, then request the user to specify one or the other but not both.

[leonard84]

Yes I think it should fail fast with a helpful error message. As for the xsd, you could add it to the description, unfortunately there is no choice equivalent in XML Schema for attributes, there seems to be some possibility to achieve this with Schematron or Schemapath, but I don't think it would improve the tool support https://www.w3.org/wiki/Attribute_mutex

[ghost]

Hi guys @leonard84, @twicksell

I know this is a quite old PR, but I just noticed that the implementation for Spies on concrete instances does not include the +Closure version of SpyImpl in SpecInternals.java.

This means I cannot provide interactions to the Spy, which is usually the purpose of creating them.

[Vampire]

For any following readers, above comment was cross-posted, answer is at #77.