> > On 4.2.2008, at 19.16, Raimond Garcia wrote: >> Interesting Jarkko... >> >> The restful routes, seem clearer than using urls, maybe not so much >> for this case, but for very long urls, that include for example the >> title of a blog, I would rather use blog_path(@blog). >> >> Yes, I want to test the full stack, for sure! However, I don't see >> how >> using named routes, stops you from doing this.... >> >> Webrat two thumbs up, I've been using selenium up to now, but would >> like to try other alternatives to see which one works better. > > What I mean by testing the full stack is that you'd e.g. have this in > your story: > > clicks_button "Delete" > > If you just use "delete some_url", there are two things that could be > missed: > > 1) You have forgotten the DELETE method from your delete button. > 2) The actual url in the form doesn't actually point to some_url. > > Neither of the two would be caught unless you used something like > Webrat to drill through the whole stack. If you're using blog_path in > the story, I feel like you're using the route to test itself. > > Cheers, > //jarkko > > -- > Jarkko Laine > http://jlaine.net > http://dotherightthing.com > http://www.railsecommerce.com > http://odesign.fi >
Excellent observations Jarkko! I'm still trying to get my head around the concept of "testing the full stack" and you just enlightened me a little more. Thanks! Rai _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
