On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 1:41 PM, Phlip <phlip2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>>> xpath :'legend[ contains(., "Personal Information") ]' and
>>> xpath :'label[ contains(., "First name") ]' and
>>> xpath :input, :type => 'text', :name => 'user[first_name]'
>
>> This is nice, but the abstractions are operating at different levels.
>> The keyword is "xpath" but the args passed to that look nothing like
>> xpath.
>
> That's because it's a DSL. You can use raw XPath, XPath with one convenience
> (:'div[ @class = "content" ]' as a symbol implies "any descendant"), or you
> can use an option hash that generates XPath.
>
> The DSL's benefit is tags like :attribute => foo will automatically escape
> their strings correctly. (That's why the top line of the diagnostic was a
> little cluttered!) foo could contain mixed ' and " payload, and we don't
> care.
>
>> How about something like:
>
>> response.body.should be_xml_with do
>> form :action => '/users' do
>> fieldset do
>> legend "Personal Information"
>> label "First name"
>
> Because I'm not webrat?
>
> Yes it would be kewt if label('yo') went into method_missing and came out as
> //label[ contains(., "yo") ]. But I have found that spot checks of
> algorithmic details, such as eRB tags, are more valuable to development than
> slavishly matching your tests to your HTML contents.
>
> If you write this HTML...
>
> <form blah>
> <input blah>
> <input blah>
> <input blah>
> </form>
>
> ...and if you test it with a sequence of assertions that exactly match it...
>
> page.should contain
> form blah
> input blah
> input blah
> input blah
> end
> end
>
> ...then you are not really doing TDD. You are merely replicating your code
> as your test, and that will only cause irritation at upgrade time or bug
> time.
I'm only talking about syntax of the DSL - I don't see how changing
the syntax would make you suddenly start writing crappy examples or
not doing TDD.
- David
> Here's an example from our projects at work:
>
> get :thanks_for_purchasing
> assert_xpath :'center[ . = "Your order has been accepted!" ]'
> assert_xpath :div, :align => :center do
> a = assert_xpath(:'p[ contains(., "questions about your membership")
> ]/a')
> assert{ a.text == a[:href] }
> assert{ a[:href] == SubscriptionController::CUSTOMER_SERVICE_LINK }
> end
>
> Note how much that specifies in the customer acknowledgment page.
>
> - the confirmation is centered
> - the explanation div is centered (yes, we could identify it better!)
> - part of the explanation div's contents contains "questions..."
> - next to the "questions..." is an <a>
> - the <a> contains an href matching its own text contents
> - the href links to our customer service system
>
> I call this topic "XPath can see around corners":
>
> http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2007/08/xpath_checker_and_assert_xpath.html
>
> We are using XPath to pin down several elements in a page, allowing the
> other elements to change freely, but forcing them to maintain their
> correlations. That test would fail, for example, if the <a> somehow moved
> away from its introductory paragraph.
>
> --
> Phlip
> http://www.zeroplayer.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
