Yes that does help, thanks! I didn't know about shared example groups.
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:12 PM, Pat Maddox <pat.mad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What is the thing that's being done in a callback and also sometimes
> called by clients? Usually the semantics are different and you don't
> want to treat them exactly the same...
>
> At any rate, you can be creative with shared example groups to get rid
> of the duplication. Something like
>
> describe "do_something", :shared => true do
> it "should update the posts_count" do
> lambda { do_action }.
> should change(subject, :posts_count).by(1)
> end
>
> it "should send an email" do
> do_action
> # however you get emails..I forget
> end
> end
>
> describe Foo, "when saved" do
> it_should_behave_like "do_something"
>
> subject { new_foo }
>
> def do_action
> subject.save!
> end
> end
>
> describe Foo, "when do_something is called" do
> it_should_behave_like "do_something"
>
> subject { new_foo }
>
> def do_action
> subject.do_something
> end
> end
>
> Does that help?
>
> Pat
>
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:25 AM, Barun Singh <baru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In many of my models, I have callback methods like this:
> >
> > class MyModel < ActiveRecord::Base
> >
> > before_save :do_something
> >
> > def do_something
> > some code here...
> > end
> >
> > end
> >
> > The do_something method is a public method that is sometimes called on
> its
> > own, and also called whenever the model is saved. Let's say there are
> six
> > specs that are required to fully test the do_something method. What is
> > considered best practice for how the before_save filter should be tested?
> > If I say that I'm only ever going to test the behavior, it means that I
> need
> > to basically rewrite those six specs to make sure they hold whenever the
> > model is saved, as well as when the do_something method is called
> > explicitly. I don't like having to repeat myself this way, particularly
> > considering that a model may have multiple callbacks like this so I end
> up
> > having to repeat myself a lot. The alternative is to just do something
> > like:
> >
> > x = MyModel.new
> > x.should_receive(:do_something)
> > x.save
> >
> > But of course this tests implementation rather than behavior which is
> > usually not desirable. But in this situation I'm tending to prefer it
> over
> > having to do a ton of rewriting of specs. What are others' thoughts on
> > this?
> >
> > Thanks..
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
