Add HasKeys parameter matcher
#512
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Much like how `HasEntry` has a related `HasEntries` matcher, this commit adds a `HasKeys` matcher to accompany `HasKey`. With this new matcher, instead of the following: ```ruby object.expects(:method).with(all_of(has_key(:key_1), has_key(:key_2), has_key(:key_3))) ``` We can just do this: ```ruby object.expects(:method).with(has_keys(:key_1, :key_2, :key_3)) ```
|
@cstyles Many thanks for this. It looks good to me. I'm having some issue with the Travis CI builds at the moment and I'm a bit short of time, so I might not get it merged for a few days. Please bear with me. |
|
I've pushed up a slightly fixed-up version of this here: https://github.com/freerange/mocha/compare/has-keys However, I'm not entirely happy with the implementation of |
|
Released in v1.13.0. See https://mocha.jamesmead.org/Mocha/ParameterMatchers.html#has_keys-instance_method. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Much like how
HasEntryhas a relatedHasEntriesmatcher, this PRadds a
HasKeysmatcher to accompanyHasKey. With this new matcher,instead of the following:
We can just do this: