ChatGPT解决这个技术问题 Extra ChatGPT

How to say "should_receive" more times in RSpec

I have this in my test

Project.should_receive(:find).with(@project).and_return(@project)

but when object receive that method call two times, I have to do

Project.should_receive(:find).with(@project).and_return(@project)
Project.should_receive(:find).with(@project).and_return(@project)

Is there any way how to say something like

Project.should_receive(:find).with(@project).and_return(@project).times(2)

C
Community

This is outdated. Please check Uri's answer below

for 2 times:

Project.should_receive(:find).twice.with(@project).and_return(@project)

for exactly n times:

Project.should_receive(:find).exactly(n).times.with(@project).and_return(@project)

for at least n times:

Project.should_receive(:msg).at_least(n).times.with(@project).and_return(@project)

more details at https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/v/2-13/docs/message-expectations/receive-counts under Receive Counts

Hope it helps =)


Seems like maybe this doesn't work with any_instance?
@YoLudke I don't know
Should use the new syntax mentioned in Uri's answer.
U
Uri Agassi

The new expect syntax of rspec will look like this:

for 2 times:

expect(Project).to receive(:find).twice.with(@project).and_return(@project)

for exactly n times:

expect(Project).to receive(:find).exactly(n).times.with(@project).and_return(@project)

for at least n times:

expect(Project).to receive(:msg).at_least(n).times.with(@project).and_return(@project)

The have_received syntax also works. expect(Project).to have_received(:find).exactly(n).times etc.
P
Prasanna

@JaredBeck pointed out. The solution didn't work for me on any_instance call.

For any instance i ended up using stub instead of should_receive.

Project.any_instance.stub(:some_method).and_return("value")

This will work for any no. of times though.


D
Drenmi

should_receive, as opposed to any_instance, expects that the class receives message the specified number of times.

any_instance on the other hand is generally used for stubbing a method.

So the first case is an expectation that we would like to test, while the second one is getting past a method to the next line so we can move on.


Drenmi I appreciate the time you have taken to add a few comma's to a post I had added almost a year ago... It did not look like there was any change to the technical aspect of the answer... Why would you down vote me for this...?