On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Rémi Gagnon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I do agree, That's what we're gonna do. it was just an example. > But what if we want to test find_thingy(in model spec) to make sure the > :conditions is set properly? You are probably more interested in the fact that find_thingy works rather then it sets a bunch of conditions. Perhaps something like the below would work for you: it "can find things by blank and blank" do thing1 = Thing.create! :nte_no => 1, vaat_id_type_statut_pcpa => 2 thing2 = Thing.create! :nte_no => 2, vaat_id_type_statut_pcpa => 3 Thing.find_by_thingy(1,2).should == thing1 Thing.find_by_thingy(2,3).should == thing2 end If you have a way of generating "things" that are valid, then I'd use that mechanism and pass in the attributes you are specifically going to be testing against (so they stand out in the example that that's what matters in the example). I know the above example breaks the one assertion per test guideline people strive to adhere to, but I think it is ok. If there are more examples that should be used to make sure find_thingy works then I'd break out a separate describe block and have multiple 'it' examples, -- Zach Dennis http://www.continuousthinking.com http://www.mutuallyhuman.com
_______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
