Andrew Premdas wrote:
>
> TIp: When writing the step don't use - visits "/invoices/new" - use
> visits "invoice_new_path". Use named routes and let the routing names
> REST and resources define where you go, and think about what you want
> to implement
This advice is really helpful. I was reading the section on routing in
"The Rails Way" last night, and it came to me that perhaps I had
overlooked the essence of what I was really trying to accomplish. That
I was so fixated on the code yet to be produced at the detail level that
I had missed the boat with respect to how the users would treat the
application as a whole. I concluded that I really needed to see the new
application, and the features that I had to write, in terms of
resources. Then, given the resource name, the requisite information
would be exposed. This in turn would expose the requirements needed to
assemble that information from data, and from those assembly
requirements would come the code requirements.
However, I was, until I read your reply, still thinking in terms of
"/application/clients/:myclient/workorders/:id/charges/:billable"
instead of
client_workorder_charges_path(@client,@client.workorders,"billable") or
however that is supposed to be expressed.
>
> If you now deal with your charges, you will probably get to the stage
> very quickly where you can't avoid clients. So then you do the very
> simplest general thing for clients.
It is impossible to undo the past. We have already invested a
considerable amount of energy and time into determining how we wish to
express the concept of a client as a transient role of some persistent
entity rather than as an artifact in itself. But, that said, I am
beginning to see that this can be set aside in the early stages.
>
> Finally every time you find that the baby step you are taking is
> actually more like a giant leap (or actually anything other than
> the smallest of steps) STOP! Then start again questioning what
> is not central and what is not specific.
>
> HTH
Very helpful. I expect that as I gather my wits regarding BDD that this
advice will prove even more valuable.
I tried a little bit of this out on one of the end users and I was
surprised at the responses that I obtained. In consequence, this is
what I contemplate beginning with.
Feature: A web based business application
In Order To: Conduct Business
Any Authorized User
Should Access the Business Application via http
To reduce costs
Scenario: The Application has a home page
Given an application accessible by http
And I am not signed in
When I browse to the url "/" on the application host
Then I should see a welcome message
And I should see a sign on request message
And I should see a sign on link
And I should see a contact us link
And I should see ...
Scenario: The Application has a sign on page
Given I am on the home page
And I am not signed in
When I select the sign on link
Then I should see the sign on page
And the protocol should be https
And I should see a text entry for user name
And I should see a text entry for password
And I should see a sign on action selector
Scenario: User Signs On Successfully
Given I am on the sign on page
And I am not signed in
And I have a user named "myuser"
And the user named "myuser" has a password of "myuserpassword"
When I provide a user name "myuser"
And I provide a password "myuserpassword"
And I select the sign on action
Then I should see a sign on success message
And I should see the users home page
Scenario: User Sign On Fails - wrong password
...
Scenario: User Sign On Fails - no such user
...
Scenario: User Sign On Fails - more than 3 attempts in 20 seconds
...
Then we have identified a new feature, the user home page. Also, one
can foresee that additional scenarios are required, like "User Signs in
>From a Secured Resource" where following a successful sign in the user
is redirected back to the resource that they originally requested. On
the users home page we discover the resources accessible by that user
are listed. From those resources the next layer of features become
exposed, and so on.
Is this getting closer to the mark or am I moving around the target but
not quite getting it?
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
