Prev: Active Record Inheritance with out using type_id
Next: Argument Error
From: Fernando Guillen on 31 Jul 2010 11:38
Hi people,

I have an application that download emails from an email account an
process them.

What I would like to do is to mock the mail download petition and not
process the real mails but an array of mails I have for this propos.

This is the precise situation: I have this:

[code]
Net::POP3.start( opts[:server], port, opts[:user], opts[:pass] )
do |pop|
pop.each_mail do |m|
block.call( m )
end
end
[/code]

I would like to have a mock that if on my test call to

=> Net::POP3.start( opts[:server], port, opts[:user], opts[:pass] ) do
|pop|

Not any mailing petition is done but the body of the method is still
working but not with real mails but with an array of fake mails like
this:

=> mails = [ File.read('/dir/mail1.raw_mail'),
File.read('/dir/mail2.raw_mail')]

Is this possible?.. am I completely lost?.. is there any better way to
do this?

Any suggestion is welcome.

Thanks

f.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From: Jesús Gabriel y Galán on 31 Jul 2010 19:10
On Sat, Jul 31, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Fernando Guillen
<fguillen.mail(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi people,
>
> I have an application that download emails from an email account an
> process them.
>
> What I would like to do is to mock the mail download petition and not
> process the real mails but an array of mails I have for this propos.
>
> This is the precise situation: I have this:
>
> [code]
>      Net::POP3.start( opts[:server], port, opts[:user], opts[:pass] )
> do |pop|
>        pop.each_mail do |m|
>          block.call( m )
>        end
>      end
> [/code]
>
> I would like to have a mock that if on my test call to
>
> => Net::POP3.start( opts[:server], port, opts[:user], opts[:pass] ) do
> |pop|
>
> Not any mailing petition is done but the body of the method is still
> working but not with real mails but with an array of fake mails like
> this:
>
> => mails = [ File.read('/dir/mail1.raw_mail'),
> File.read('/dir/mail2.raw_mail')]
>
> Is this possible?.. am I completely lost?.. is there any better way to
> do this?

One option would be to change the start method of Net::POP3 to do
exactly what you describe.
Remember that Ruby is open and you can redefine any method on any
class. You can always alias the method start before changing it, so
you can revert to the original definition after the test.

Jesus.

From: Fernando Guillen on 1 Aug 2010 04:40
Jesús Gabriel y Galán wrote:
> One option would be to change the start method of Net::POP3 to do
> exactly what you describe

This is a good idea.

I can open the class Net::POP3 and redefine the method .start.

Now, how can I organize this to charge the redefinition of the method at
the beginning of the test and revert it at the end of the test.

I mean, if I have a file that redefine the Net::POP3.start method I can
'require' it but I don't know how to 'un-require' it.

Also I would like to simulate that the Net::POP3.start charges my mails
array (different on every test) and if I redefine this method in a
generic way I don't know how to use my mails array inside the redefined
method.

Example, if I have my own redefinition of the method like:

[code]
class Net::POP3
def self.start( *, &block )

(How can I put my mails array in here?)

end
end
[/code]

I think I need some kind of mocking tutorial or something, if you know
any one and you can offer me the link it will be great.

Thanks

f.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From: Jesús Gabriel y Galán on 2 Aug 2010 02:20
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 10:40 AM, Fernando Guillen
<fguillen.mail(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Jesús Gabriel y Galán wrote:
>> One option would be to change the start method of Net::POP3 to do
>> exactly what you describe
>
> This is a good idea.
>
> I can open the class Net::POP3 and redefine the method .start.
>
> Now, how can I organize this to charge the redefinition of the method at
> the beginning of the test and revert it at the end of the test.

You can use alias_method to "save" a copy of the original method with
another name. You can do this in the setup of your tests, and revert
back to that version in the teardown:

irb(main):001:0> class A
irb(main):002:1> def self.test
irb(main):003:2> "original test"
irb(main):004:2> end
irb(main):005:1> end

irb(main):013:0> class A
irb(main):014:1> class << self
irb(main):015:2> alias_method :orig_test, :test
irb(main):016:2> end
irb(main):017:1> end

# at this point you can call A.test and A.orig_test and both do the same
# now you can create a new version of the method:

irb(main):020:0> class A
irb(main):021:1> def self.test
irb(main):022:2> "new test, original was [#{orig_test}]"
irb(main):023:2> end
irb(main):024:1> end
=> nil
irb(main):025:0> A.test
=> "new test, original was [original test]"
irb(main):026:0> A.orig_test
=> "original test"

As you can see, you can still refer to the original method. To put it back:

irb(main):027:0> class A
irb(main):028:1> class << self
irb(main):029:2> alias_method :test, :orig_test
irb(main):030:2> end
irb(main):031:1> end
=> #<Class:A>
irb(main):032:0> A.test
=> "original test"

(this leaves the orig_test method around, but I don't think that would
be a problem).

>
> I mean, if I have a file that redefine the Net::POP3.start method I can
> 'require' it but I don't know how to 'un-require' it.
>
> Also I would like to simulate that the Net::POP3.start charges my mails
> array (different on every test) and if I redefine this method in a
> generic way I don't know how to use my mails array inside the redefined
> method.

If this is just for running a test you could use a global variable or
a constant:

irb(main):034:0> MY_EMAILS = %w{a b c d e}
=> ["a", "b", "c", "d", "e"]
irb(main):035:0> class A
irb(main):036:1> class << self
irb(main):037:2> alias_method :orig_test, :test
irb(main):038:2> def test
irb(main):039:3> "my emails: #{MY_EMAILS}"
irb(main):040:3> end
irb(main):041:2> end
irb(main):042:1> end
=> nil
irb(main):043:0> A.test
=> "my emails: abcde"

You can also look at class_eval and define_method to build a closure
around your emails' variable (sorry, don't have time now to do that,
I'll come back later if you need it).

Jesus.

From: Fernando Guillen on 2 Aug 2010 02:28
Jesús, Thank you so much for your help.

I think I have enough information to work by my self.

Thanks for your work.

f.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Active Record Inheritance with out using type_id
Next: Argument Error