Re: [rspec-users] Can you explain this code to me?
On 8.2.2008, at 1.26, Pito Salas wrote: > I am experimenting with the restful-authentication plug in and I see > that it has generated an rspec encantation which I had not seen > before: > > it 'allows signup' do >lambda do > create_user > response.should be_redirect >end.should change(User, :count).by(1) > end > > What does the combination of a lambda and a .should mean? Lambda is an anonymous function, or pretty much the same as a block of code. So in the case above, running the code inside the lambda block should change the user count by one. This is the same as assert_difference does in test/unit. > > > Similarly but a little different: > > describe 'being created' do >before do > @user = nil > @creating_user = lambda do >@user = create_user >violated "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" if > @user.new_record? > end >end > >it 'increments User#count' do > @creating_user.should change(User, :count).by(1) >end > end > > Thanks for any pointers or clarifications! Same thing, just this time the function is first stored in an instance variable. //jarkko -- Jarkko Laine http://jlaine.net http://dotherightthing.com http://www.railsecommerce.com http://odesign.fi ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
[rspec-users] Shared Examples + “initialized c onstant” warnings
Hi List, I'm using rspec's shared example groups in a rails project (rails 2.02, rspec(on_rails) 1.1.3) and I'm getting lots of errors of the following kind when(before) running the specs: (RAILS_ROOT)/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/extensions/main.rb:78: warning: already initialized constant ContentExamples (RAILS_ROOT)/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/extensions/main.rb:78: warning: already initialized constant EditViewExamples The shared example groups are defined in files like spec/shared/ foo_examples.rb and declared as share_as :FooExamples do…end (and then included in other example groups with "include FooExamples") They're loaded in spec_helper.rb with the following: Dir.glob(File.join(File.dirname(__FILE__), 'shared', '*.rb')).each do | shared_example| require shared_example end I'm guessing that's what needs to change. Has anyone else seen these warnings? I find them quite annoying and would like to get rid of them. Any pointers would be much appreciated. Thanks, Gerrit ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Re: [rspec-users] Can you explain this code to me?
On Feb 7, 2008 3:40 PM, Bira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 7, 2008 9:26 PM, Pito Salas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > What does the combination of a lambda and a .should mean? > > I'm new to the list, but I think I can answer that :). > > >From what I know, it means that RSpec will run the lambda's code and > check that it had the effect specified in the "should" call. > > And from that I can determine by looking at the two incantations you > posted, the lambda is used because the code can throw an error, and > the spec's author didn't want the first error to prevent the outer > "should" from being checked. Sometimes, but in this case, what you are trying to do is before_count = User.send :count create_user response.should be_redirect User.send(:count).should == before_count + 1 that's some boilerplate that can be abstracted away... def change(target, method) before_count = target.send method yield target.send(method).should == before_count + 1 end (not exactly how it's implemented, but it should give you a rough idea of what's going on) Pat ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Re: [rspec-users] Can you explain this code to me?
On Feb 7, 2008 5:26 PM, Pito Salas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am experimenting with the restful-authentication plug in and I see > that it has generated an rspec encantation which I had not seen > before: > > it 'allows signup' do > lambda do > create_user > response.should be_redirect > end.should change(User, :count).by(1) > end > > What does the combination of a lambda and a .should mean? This should answer your question: http://rspec.info/rdoc/classes/Spec/Matchers.html#M000386 HTH, David > > Similarly but a little different: > > describe 'being created' do > before do > @user = nil > @creating_user = lambda do > @user = create_user > violated "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" if > @user.new_record? > end > end > > it 'increments User#count' do > @creating_user.should change(User, :count).by(1) > end > end > > Thanks for any pointers or clarifications! > ___ > 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
Re: [rspec-users] Can you explain this code to me?
On Feb 7, 2008 9:26 PM, Pito Salas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What does the combination of a lambda and a .should mean? I'm new to the list, but I think I can answer that :). >From what I know, it means that RSpec will run the lambda's code and check that it had the effect specified in the "should" call. And from that I can determine by looking at the two incantations you posted, the lambda is used because the code can throw an error, and the spec's author didn't want the first error to prevent the outer "should" from being checked. -- Bira http://compexplicita.wordpress.com http://compexplicita.tumblr.com ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
[rspec-users] Can you explain this code to me?
I am experimenting with the restful-authentication plug in and I see that it has generated an rspec encantation which I had not seen before: it 'allows signup' do lambda do create_user response.should be_redirect end.should change(User, :count).by(1) end What does the combination of a lambda and a .should mean? Similarly but a little different: describe 'being created' do before do @user = nil @creating_user = lambda do @user = create_user violated "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" if @user.new_record? end end it 'increments User#count' do @creating_user.should change(User, :count).by(1) end end Thanks for any pointers or clarifications! ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Re: [rspec-users] Problems testing rss feed controller.
On 2/7/08, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 7, 2008 2:27 PM, Rick DeNatale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I've got a controller which produces an RSS feed, pretty much based on > > Ryan Bates recent RailsCast. > > > > I'm having a heck of a time getting the spec to successfully fetch the > > feed though. I gave up got it working without a spec, and I'm now > > trying to back up and get the spec to work. > > Try integrate_views: > > describe PodcastRssFeedController do > integrate_views > ... > end > > Without that, render gets modified by rspec (to isolate your > controllers from their views). Thanks for the quick reply David, that was the problem, athough I found that it needs to go into the nested example group, not the outer one. -- Rick DeNatale My blog on Ruby http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Re: [rspec-users] Problems testing rss feed controller.
On Feb 7, 2008 2:27 PM, Rick DeNatale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've got a controller which produces an RSS feed, pretty much based on
> Ryan Bates recent RailsCast.
>
> I'm having a heck of a time getting the spec to successfully fetch the
> feed though. I gave up got it working without a spec, and I'm now
> trying to back up and get the spec to work.
>
> The controller is simplicity itself:
>
> class PodcastRssFeedController < ApplicationController
>
> def index
> @podcasts = Podcast.latest(100)
> end
>
> end
>
> I have a route which gets to the index action and sets :format =>
> :rss, as I said this produces a valid rss response in the real world,
> just not in the spec.
>
> Here's the basic spec:
>
> require File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper'
> require File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../be_valid_feed'
>
> def mock_podcast(i)
> mock_model(
> Podcast,
> :artist_name_slug => "Artist#{i}"
> )
> end
>
> describe PodcastRssFeedController do
>
> before(:all) do
> @podcasts = (1..5).map {|i| mock_podcast(i)}
> Podcast.stub!(:latest).and_return(@podcasts)
> end
>
> describe 'handling GET brightsidepodcasts/rss.xml' do
>
> def do_get
> @request.format = 'rss'
> get 'index', :format => :rss
> end
>
> it "should successfully get feed" do
> do_get
> response.should be_success
> end
>
> it "should validate" do
> do_get
> response.should be_valid_feed
> end
> end
>
> end
>
> The validation example is failing because the response body is being returned
> as
> podcast_rss_feed/index
>
> I've tried stepping through with rdebug and I can't figure out where
> it's going wrong.
>
> I eventually end up here:
>
>1099 logger.info("Rendering #{template_path}" + (status ?
> " (#{status})" : '')) if logger
> => 1100 render_for_text(@template.render_file(template_path,
> use_full_path, locals), status)
>1101end
>1102
>1103def render_for_text(text = nil, status = nil,
> append_response = false) #:nodoc:
>1104 @performed_render = true
> /Users/rick/Documents/terralien/brightside/site/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/base.rb:1100
>
> When I s(tep) into this I end up here:
>
>173 @template.metaclass.class_eval do
>174define_method :file_exists? do
>175 true
>176end
>177define_method :render_file do |*args|
> => 178 @first_render ||= args[0]
>179end
>180 end
>181end
>182 end
> /Users/rick/Documents/terralien/brightside/site/vendor/plugins/rspec_on_rails/lib/spec/rails/example/controller_example_group.rb:178
>
> It looks like the real ActionView::Base.render_file never gets called
> and that's where it looks like the realization that it's looking for
> rss rather than say html seems to happen.
>
> Can anyone shed any light on this?
Try integrate_views:
describe PodcastRssFeedController do
integrate_views
...
end
Without that, render gets modified by rspec (to isolate your
controllers from their views).
HTH,
David
>
> --
> Rick DeNatale
>
> My blog on Ruby
> http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.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
[rspec-users] Problems testing rss feed controller.
I've got a controller which produces an RSS feed, pretty much based on
Ryan Bates recent RailsCast.
I'm having a heck of a time getting the spec to successfully fetch the
feed though. I gave up got it working without a spec, and I'm now
trying to back up and get the spec to work.
The controller is simplicity itself:
class PodcastRssFeedController < ApplicationController
def index
@podcasts = Podcast.latest(100)
end
end
I have a route which gets to the index action and sets :format =>
:rss, as I said this produces a valid rss response in the real world,
just not in the spec.
Here's the basic spec:
require File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper'
require File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../be_valid_feed'
def mock_podcast(i)
mock_model(
Podcast,
:artist_name_slug => "Artist#{i}"
)
end
describe PodcastRssFeedController do
before(:all) do
@podcasts = (1..5).map {|i| mock_podcast(i)}
Podcast.stub!(:latest).and_return(@podcasts)
end
describe 'handling GET brightsidepodcasts/rss.xml' do
def do_get
@request.format = 'rss'
get 'index', :format => :rss
end
it "should successfully get feed" do
do_get
response.should be_success
end
it "should validate" do
do_get
response.should be_valid_feed
end
end
end
The validation example is failing because the response body is being returned as
podcast_rss_feed/index
I've tried stepping through with rdebug and I can't figure out where
it's going wrong.
I eventually end up here:
1099 logger.info("Rendering #{template_path}" + (status ?
" (#{status})" : '')) if logger
=> 1100 render_for_text(@template.render_file(template_path,
use_full_path, locals), status)
1101end
1102
1103def render_for_text(text = nil, status = nil,
append_response = false) #:nodoc:
1104 @performed_render = true
/Users/rick/Documents/terralien/brightside/site/vendor/rails/actionpack/lib/action_controller/base.rb:1100
When I s(tep) into this I end up here:
173 @template.metaclass.class_eval do
174define_method :file_exists? do
175 true
176end
177define_method :render_file do |*args|
=> 178 @first_render ||= args[0]
179end
180 end
181end
182 end
/Users/rick/Documents/terralien/brightside/site/vendor/plugins/rspec_on_rails/lib/spec/rails/example/controller_example_group.rb:178
It looks like the real ActionView::Base.render_file never gets called
and that's where it looks like the realization that it's looking for
rss rather than say html seems to happen.
Can anyone shed any light on this?
--
Rick DeNatale
My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Re: [rspec-users] Shared examples not reloading in spec_server
On Feb 7, 2008 9:39 AM, Charles Grindel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am currently running RSpec 1.1.3 with ZenTest 3.9.1 on Windows XP. I have > noticed that shared examples are not being reloaded by spec_server when they > have been updated. Below is a simple example that reproduces the problem. > The example code and output is at the location below. > > > http://pastie.caboo.se/148688 > > I have confirmed that non-shared examples are being reloaded by spec_server. > So, here are my questions. > > 1. Has anyone else noticed this behavior? > > 2. Does anyone know how I can force spec_server to reload the shared > examples? > > 3. If this smells like a bug, can someone point me to instructions for > filing a bug? Sounds like a problem with your autotest configuration, not with spec_server. Try it without spec server to verify that is correct. If it's that autotest isn't loading them, you just need to add a mapping in .autotest. Read the ZenTest docs for more info and/or check out my blog post on this: http://blog.davidchelimsky.net/articles/2008/01/15/rspec-1-1-2-and-zentest-3-8-0. If you try that and you still think it's an rspec bug, file a ticket at http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com. Cheers, David > > Thanks, > Chuck > > ___ > 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] Shared examples not reloading in spec_server
I am currently running RSpec 1.1.3 with ZenTest 3.9.1 on Windows XP. I have noticed that shared examples are not being reloaded by spec_server when they have been updated. Below is a simple example that reproduces the problem. The example code and output is at the location below. http://pastie.caboo.se/148688 I have confirmed that non-shared examples are being reloaded by spec_server. So, here are my questions. 1. Has anyone else noticed this behavior? 2. Does anyone know how I can force spec_server to reload the shared examples? 3. If this smells like a bug, can someone point me to instructions for filing a bug? Thanks, Chuck___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Re: [rspec-users] Rspec accessing the wrong id?
On 6.2.2008, at 11.16, David Currin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is probably straightforward to solve. I'm new to rspec so I hope
> you'll be patient with me. I've created a model method which works in
> practice, but which rspec is not passing. I'm obviously not going
> about things in the right way in rspec so I'd appreciate any advice
> offered.
>
> Here's the (releveant parts of the) method which sets up a one to many
> relationship between Company and Projects.
>
> def.self create_project(record)
>parent_company = Company.find_by_basecampid(record.company.id)
>project = self.find_or_initialize_by_basecampid(record.id)
>project.company_id = parent_company.id
> end
>
> In rspec I've got this:
>
> def parent_company_attributes
>{
> :id => 1,
> :basecampid => 448718,
> :name => "The Media Collective"
>}
> end
>
> before do
>
> mock_record
> Company.should_receive(:find_by_basecampid).
>with(parent_company_attributes[:basecampid]).
>and_return(parent_company_attributes)
You're returning a hash here. If you call id for hash (like you do in
this case), it will return the object id, not the element with key :id.
I think what you want to do is to create a mock_model with that hash
and then stub Company.find_by_basecampid to return that mock object.
//jarkko
>
>
> @project = Project.create_project(record)
>
> end
>
> it "should populate company_id" do
>@project.company_id.should eql(parent_company_attributes[:id])
> end
>
>
> The problem is that it looks like rspec is using the object id rather
> than the id from parent_company_attributes. Here's the failure
> message:
>
> 1)
> 'Project.create project record should populate company_id' FAILED
> expected 1, got 8817400 (using .eql?)
>
> Thanks for any insights
>
> David Currin
> ___
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
--
Jarkko Laine
http://jlaine.net
http://dotherightthing.com
http://www.railsecommerce.com
http://odesign.fi
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Re: [rspec-users] outside-in BDD vs writing examples up front
This is a short reply, but thinking about it a bit deeper, I have to agree with Dan. What especially caught my attention was this piece: > If you start with a narrow, end-to-end piece of functionality and drill into > it from the outside, right through until you have it working, you will find > that at each layer of abstraction you will have a pretty focused subset of > behaviour to implement to get the job done. I think this comment is brilliant, as it is a more concrete viewpoint of what "BDD manifesto" mentions about business value (http://behaviour-driven.org/WheresTheBusinessValue). As it happens, one of my main concerns with TDD was that it didn't seem to have any strong opinions or rules about a) order of writing specifications regarding level of abstraction or architectural structure (eg. I prefer V, C, M spec order in Rails, as it starts from what the supposed client would see) b) how to pick the first test/spec you are going to implement. Dan, I think your post gave an excellent answer (well, at least one) to those questions -- and it also seems to be an opinion popular among those few BDD practitioners _I know_ of; outside-in practically clears out part a), as you are starting with high-level stuff like stories, going deeper driven by requirements of higher level entities. Part b) becomes much easier when you think about the clients priorities: what feature gives the most business value for the client at the moment? When starting an issue tracking system from the scratch, probably the ability to submit new tickets becomes first -- that is, even before being able to view them. Though quite obvious in retrospective, the emphasis on business value in BDD gives IMO extra structure and support for otherwise rather chaotic field of software engineering, especially when the idea is applied in concrete rules of the methodology. Thanks! -- "One day, when he was naughty, Mr Bunnsy looked over the hedge into Farmer Fred's field and it was full of fresh green lettuces. Mr Bunnsy, however, was not full of lettuces. This did not seem fair." -- Terry Pratchett, Mr. Bunnsy Has An Adventure ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
