I'm going through Michael Hartl's Rails tutorial, and I am happy to report that (as of the end of section 7) I'm able to get things working. (That said, I skipped the section on automated testing, as Hartl warned that automated testing is the most likely part of his book to become outdated.)
There is a heavy emphasis on the "bundle exec rspec spec" tests. I agree that testing is a very necessary part of development. As I go through the rest of this tutorial, I will continue to test when instructed. That said, how essential are the "bundle exec rspec spec" tests in most real world apps? My reasons for possibly not using them or not using them as thoroughly as the tutorial does: 1. I still feel more comfortable testing by accessing my web site in the browser and trying things out as if I were one of my users. 2. Creating the tests does add to the workload. 3. Garbage in -> garbage out: If you don't write the proper tests, your results don't matter but could cause you to needlessly obsess over something that actually works but you erroneously think is in error, or you could think something works when it doesn't. After I finish railstutorial.org, I will start my first Ruby on Rails web site, which will profile mutual funds and ETFs. How important is it that I do the "bundle exec rspec spec" testing as thoroughly as the tutorial does? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-talk/-/QAY7xmnJg3EJ. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
