On Nov 7, 2011, at 4:13 PM, Matt Wynne wrote: > > On 7 Nov 2011, at 18:37, Justin Ko wrote: > >> On Nov 2, 2011, at 12:01 PM, Rob Aldred wrote: >> >>> >>> I'm pretty sure this has probably been discussed before. >>> I'm using couchdb (couchrest_model) >>> >>> When speccing my controller i want to set expectations that im calling my >>> couch views correctly. >>> The query interface has recently been updated to work very similar to ARel >>> >>> This means i have to rewrite some of my specs. >>> >>> Old call: >>> >>> Exam.by_created_at_and_not_archived(:start_key => [@exam.created_at], >>> :endkey => ['0'],:limit => 2) >>> >>> I set an expectation on that easily like so: >>> >>> Exam.should_receive(:by_created_at_and_not_archived). >>> with(:startkey => [@exam1.created_at],:endkey => ['0'],:limit => 2). >>> and_return([@exam1,@exam2]) >>> >>> However the new api i doesn't seem that easy to work with: >>> >>> >>> Exam.by_created_at_and_not_archived.startkey([@exam.created_at]).endkey(['0']).limit(2) >>> >>> I could use stub_chain, but that doesn't allow me to check the params being >>> passes to the calls other than the last. >>> I could also create a wrapper method on my Exam model that is called from >>> the controller with hash params, >>> however that just shifts the problem, I then have to check the expections >>> in the model spec instead. >>> >>> Suggestions on how best to go about that would be appreciated. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rspec-users mailing list >>> rspec-users@rubyforge.org >>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users >> >> Exam.should_receive(:by_created_at_and_not_archived).and_return( >> double('startkey').tap {|startkey| >> startkey.should_receive(:startkey).with([@exam.created_at]).and_return( >> double('endkey').tap {|endkey| >> endkey.should_receive(:endkey).with(['0']).and_return( >> double('limit').tap {|limit| >> limit.should_receive(:limit).with(2).and_return([@exam1, @exam2]) >> } >> ) >> } >> ) >> } >> ) >> >> LOL, this is the ugliest code I've written all year. You'd might want to use >> variables for readability: > > ...or even wrap this Exam thing in an abstraction layer? Can anyone else hear > the tests screaming?
Personally, I wouldn't mock this code at all. It's a data retrieval method, let it hit CouchDB (abstracted or not). > > :) > > cheers, > Matt > > -- > Freelance programmer & coach > Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book (with Aslak Hellesøy) > Founder, http://relishapp.com > +44(0)7974430184 | http://twitter.com/mattwynne > > _______________________________________________ > 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
