[Turn Off] ExpectInHook

[juriglx]

I don't like ExpectInHook

I think it is useful to setup something like:

before { expect(obj).to receive(:foo) }

The laziest solution, because we also have only one expect per spec, is to change it to:

before { allow(obj).to receive(:foo) }

But this weakens the test requirements, which should not be an effect of rubocop.

[fnoeh]

Agree.

[fanaugen]

I think that cop is useful: expectations belong in it or specify blocks, not in before or after hooks. imho the pattern when you stub a method but want to assert that the method is called, should be like this (even at the cost of duplication):

# ↓ before block, or inside example
allow(obj).to receive(:foo).and_return(:bar)

# ↓ inside example
expect(obj).to have_received(:foo)

because we also have only one expect per spec

I think ↑ that is the cop that is more harmful than useful. It appears to be less strict in loveos-backend, where 2 expects are allowed per example. My vote is to turn off RSpec/MultipleExpectations altogether and rely on people’s best judgment not to put 100 expects into one it (but even that can in rare cases be acceptable, e.g. in a loop?)