On Dec 4, 2007 9:56 PM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2007 9:49 PM, Jonathan Linowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > damn, looks like I'm going to have to come up with 997 more good
> > ideas just to break even
> > :)
>
> Tell you what, I'll withdraw 999 and leave it as a -1
On Dec 4, 2007 9:49 PM, Jonathan Linowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> damn, looks like I'm going to have to come up with 997 more good
> ideas just to break even
> :)
Tell you what, I'll withdraw 999 and leave it as a -1. That leaves you
at +2 I believe.
> On Dec 4, 2007, at 4:18 PM, David Chelim
damn, looks like I'm going to have to come up with 997 more good
ideas just to break even
:)
On Dec 4, 2007, at 4:18 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>
>> -1000
>>
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinf
OK, I see your strategy now. Rather than mock the String argument, mock Order
to confirm that it gets called with an array. Nice!
Al
- Original Message
From: Jarkko Laine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: rspec-users
Sent: Tuesday, December 4, 2007 1:49:17 PM
Subject: Re: [rspec-users] params
Thanks, David! Glad I'm unstuck on this :)
David Chelimsky-2 wrote:
>
> On Dec 4, 2007 11:49 AM, schleg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> This may be a dumb noob issue, but I haven't found any answers while
>> seaching
>> the forum--
>>
>> I have a controller method
>>
>> def edit
>> @user
Is there a way I can write something like a shared behaviour for all views that
just checks the page responds with a 200 status and has a title, meta tags, and
an h1?
Here's an idea for a shared behaviour (that only applies if I set views to use
it manually with it_should_behave_like "a standar
On 4.12.2007, at 23.11, Al Chou wrote:
> I think Jarkko is saying that no spec should have been written for
> the code I was trying to fix/change. I'm not sure I would agree
> that BDD/RSpec is an inappropriate tool for documenting what I was
> trying to change, but I think he would argue
David Chelimsky wrote:
>
> Try:
>
> http://rspec.rubyforge.org/svn/trunk/rspec
> http://rspec.rubyforge.org/svn/trunk/rspec_on_rails
That worked much better.
Thanks
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@r
On Dec 4, 2007 3:00 PM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2007 2:54 PM, Jonathan Linowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > >>
> > >> This should be:
> > >>
> > >> @user.should_receive(:password_confirmation=)
> > >>
> > >
> > > Lots of beginners make this mistake. Maybe RSpec'
I think Jarkko is saying that no spec should have been written for the code I
was trying to fix/change. I'm not sure I would agree that BDD/RSpec is an
inappropriate tool for documenting what I was trying to change, but I think he
would argue that
Al
- Original Message
From: Davi
err, that suggestion was supposed to read @user.should_set...
etc
On Dec 4, 2007, at 3:54 PM, Jonathan Linowes wrote:
>
>>>
>>> This should be:
>>>
>>> @user.should_receive(:password_confirmation=)
>>>
>>
>> Lots of beginners make this mistake. Maybe RSpec's mock framework
>> should be smart enou
On Dec 4, 2007 2:54 PM, Jonathan Linowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>
> >> This should be:
> >>
> >> @user.should_receive(:password_confirmation=)
> >>
> >
> > Lots of beginners make this mistake. Maybe RSpec's mock framework
> > should be smart enough to suggest this fix by itself.
> >
> > Pa
>>
>> This should be:
>>
>> @user.should_receive(:password_confirmation=)
>>
>
> Lots of beginners make this mistake. Maybe RSpec's mock framework
> should be smart enough to suggest this fix by itself.
>
> Patch anyone?
>
> Aslak
>>
perhaps be even more explicit that it's an accessor, like
User
On 5/12/2007, at 9:43 AM, Matthew Lins wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm running AutoTest with Rspec on a Rails application.
>
> Every 20 or so runs I get "stack level too deep" on one particular
> controller stub.
>
>
So this spec fails when you just run it?? I was a little unsure if
you are having a
Hello,
I'm running AutoTest with Rspec on a Rails application.
Every 20 or so runs I get "stack level too deep" on one particular
controller stub.
Ex.
controller.stub!(:login).and_return(true)
This particular line is in a before block of a certain describe block. The
strange thing is, every si
On Dec 4, 2007, at 3:20 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2007 2:13 PM, Chris Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Is anyone else getting this message?
>>
>> With rails 2.0 pre-releases it looks like you also have to be working
>> with the latest version of rpsec.
>>
>> $ ruby script/plugin i
On Dec 4, 2007 2:13 PM, Chris Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is anyone else getting this message?
>
> With rails 2.0 pre-releases it looks like you also have to be working
> with the latest version of rpsec.
>
> $ ruby script/plugin install
> svn://rubyforge.org/var/svn/rspec/trunk/rspec
> svn:
On Dec 4, 2007 2:09 PM, Al Chou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I get what you're saying, but I was trying to fix a bug in existing code in
> Substruct (that I did not write) that was caused by Rails passing the array
> as a /-delimited string and then not automatically decoding that string. As
> S
On Nov 30, 2007 3:28 PM, Jens-Christian Fischer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Code is available at: http://svn.eastmedia.net/public/plugins/webrat/
>
> > * Rails integration tests in Test::Unit _or_
> > * RSpec stories (using an RSpec version >= revision 2997)
>
> I had to add:
>
> require 'cg
Is anyone else getting this message?
With rails 2.0 pre-releases it looks like you also have to be working
with the latest version of rpsec.
$ ruby script/plugin install
svn://rubyforge.org/var/svn/rspec/trunk/rspec
svn: Connection closed unexpectedly
The above is what I get when I try to instal
I get what you're saying, but I was trying to fix a bug in existing code in
Substruct (that I did not write) that was caused by Rails passing the array as
a /-delimited string and then not automatically decoding that string. As
Substruct does not say that Edge Rails is a requirement, I felt it
On Dec 4, 2007 8:02 PM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Dec 4, 2007 11:49 AM, schleg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > This may be a dumb noob issue, but I haven't found any answers while
> > seaching
> > the forum--
> >
> > I have a controller method
> >
> > def edit
> > @u
On Dec 4, 2007 11:49 AM, schleg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This may be a dumb noob issue, but I haven't found any answers while seaching
> the forum--
>
> I have a controller method
>
> def edit
> @user = User.find params[:id]
> @user.password_confirmation = @user.password
> end
>
>
This may be a dumb noob issue, but I haven't found any answers while seaching
the forum--
I have a controller method
def edit
@user = User.find params[:id]
@user.password_confirmation = @user.password
end
The User class has an "attr_accessor :password_confirmation" definition (so
"p
On 4.12.2007, at 18.19, Al Chou wrote:
> Going back to my original message, I have the following at the
> beginning of the download method:
>
> def download
>@orders = Order.find( params[:ids] )
>...
>
> The problem is that params[:ids], although built as an Array object
> by the vi
Going back to my original message, I have the following at the beginning of the
download method:
def download
@orders = Order.find( params[:ids] )
...
The problem is that params[:ids], although built as an Array object by the view
that calls the download method on the controller, is pa
cheers Tom. That worked. I'll go dig in the rspec source...
On 04/12/2007, Tom Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 4 Dec 2007, at 15:41, Andy Goundry wrote:
> > I've created the following spec test to simply ensure that the
> > Account model receives a call to :new, but the spec is failing as
On 4 Dec 2007, at 15:41, Andy Goundry wrote:
> I've created the following spec test to simply ensure that the
> Account model receives a call to :new, but the spec is failing as it
> also receives a call to :save! and it isn't expecting it. I am using
> "@account = mock_model(Account)". If i
Good day all :-)
I am getting into RSpec and am a little confused by an aspect of mocks /
mock_models in controller tests. I've gone through the online docs and the
PeepCode movies and have them slightly contradictory on this matter. I hope
you can clarify. Many thanks in advance :-)
I'm writing
On 4.12.2007, at 17.13, Al Chou wrote:
> Ah, thanks! That was a breakthrough. My mock object "ids_string"
> isn't receiving the method calls I expect (even though the code
> under test actually does what I want it to do and works correctly),
> but at least I'm past the params issue.
You d
Ah, thanks! That was a breakthrough. My mock object "ids_string" isn't
receiving the method calls I expect (even though the code under test actually
does what I want it to do and works correctly), but at least I'm past the
params issue.
Al
- Original Message
From: Daniel Tenner <[E
Try:
get :download, :ids => ids_string
You need the ":" in front of the action name.
Daniel
On 4 Dec 2007, at 09:28 4 Dec 2007, Al Chou wrote:
I actually did stub Order.find() but was getting a nil object error
because params[:ids] was nil. I can't write
controller.download :ids => '1/2/3
I actually did stub Order.find() but was getting a nil object error because
params[:ids] was nil. I can't write
controller.download :ids => '1/2/3'
in the controller spec, and
get download, :ids => ids_string
results in the following error message:
NameError in 'Admin::OrdersController s
On 4.12.2007, at 10.17, Al Chou wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> I'm trying to write a spec for a controller method that starts out:
>
>
> def download
> @orders = Order.find( params[:ids] )
> ...
>
> and started writing a spec that set params[:ids] to a mock.
Why would you want to set params[:id
Hi, all,
I'm trying to write a spec for a controller method that starts out:
def download
@orders = Order.find( params[:ids] )
...
and started writing a spec that set params[:ids] to a mock. I was surprised to
discover that controller specs (at least in RSpec 1.0.8) don't offer the
35 matches
Mail list logo
