On 10 Apr 2008, at 17:59, David Chelimsky wrote: > I definitely agree with this, however I do see a difference between > accessing models directly through their API (which I do) and accessing > the internals of the request cycle (which I don't).
Ok that's what I was doing - not interfering with anything, just using a lower-level API in the same story as a high-level API. Perhaps it wouldn't have felt as strange if I was using a web service request instead of ORM calls? and Pat wrote: >> - is this acceptable in the long run, if you write a story that shows >> that the database changes produce the corresponding user-visible >> changes? > > I'm not entirely sure what you mean here. But generally if I'm > testing that the user sees something, then I also want to include the > step where they initiate that chain of events. Sorry wasn't clear what I meant. I was thinking something like Given ... When I run User.create!(:foo => "bar") Then the Users page should have a row with "bar" in the "foo" column etc... Ashley -- http://www.patchspace.co.uk/ http://aviewfromafar.net/ _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
