On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Tom Hoen wrote:
> With the great help of David C., Scott T., and Dennis Z., redirecting
> while using a sub-domain worked in Dennis' fork:
> git://github.com/zdennis/webrat.git.
>
> Unfortunately, after upgrading to 4.1 (so I could use set_hidden_field),
> I am gett
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Ben Mabey wrote:
> Any thoughts? Are Ruby's Object Mothers really Test Data Builders?
Here's what I think is important:
* Make fixture setup explicit by inlining it on a per example/group basis
* Keep fixture setup short by hiding the object graph construction
*
Inspired by Nick Evans' RSpec progress bar[1], I had a little crack at
implementing the progress bar for cucumber, 'cause I want to know how
long a break I can take while the features are running :)
It's in my fork, in the coverage_formatter branch:
http://github.com/mattwynne/cucumber/tree/m
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Tom Hoen wrote:
> Did not all of Dennis's changes make it in?
As far as I know I merged everything in. Please feel free to open up
a ticket in lighthouse, and/or startup a thread on the Webrat mailing
list with a specific example of whats going wrong and we'll get
I am writing a custom rake task for rcov. The intent is top produce
three variants of a test, each using slightly different options. This
is the basic code:
R_RCOV_AGGREG_FILE= 'coverage.data'
# Use single quotes here so that regexp argument is not munged.
R_RCOV_EXCLUDE_DIR= 'lib
Bart Zonneveld wrote:
> Using version 0.4.1, I can succesfully set hidden field using
> set_hidden_field.
>
Bart - Thanks for the heads up that 4.1 was released and contained the
set_hidden_field method.
I have updated my webrat plugin to 4.1, but unfortunately, sub-domain
redirects seem to b
Nat points out that problems with Object Mother arise when people
start adding factory methods to deal with the edge cases, such as
ObjectMother.new_invoice_with_no_postal_code. I totally agree that
this would be a problem since such abstraction results in hard to
follow tests (this is w
With the great help of David C., Scott T., and Dennis Z., redirecting
while using a sub-domain worked in Dennis' fork:
git://github.com/zdennis/webrat.git.
Unfortunately, after upgrading to 4.1 (so I could use set_hidden_field),
I am getting responses of "You are being redirected" instead of getti
On 5 Feb 2009, at 16:55, David Chelimsky wrote:
We also have a naming conflict in terms of test categories. The
definitions as I understand them are:
* Unit tests test units - generally one object at a time, or perhaps
more than one object that live within a single component, but never
crossi
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:17 AM, Ben Mabey wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>> I highly recommend this blog post by Jay Fields:
>> http://blog.jayfields.com/2009/02/thoughts-on-developer-testing.html
>>
>
It sounded to me like another of those "xxx is not a panacea" articles, and
that "you should
got it. The normal FormBuilder class uses template as a pass through for
the basic form fields.
before do
helper = Object.new.extend ActionView::Helpers::FormHelper
@object = mock_model(Foo)
@builder = RandomFormBuilder(:foo, @object, helper, {}, nil)
end
then all works beautifully.
On Th
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Ben Mabey wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>>
>> I highly recommend this blog post by Jay Fields:
>> http://blog.jayfields.com/2009/02/thoughts-on-developer-testing.html
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David
>> ___
>> rspec-users mailing
David Chelimsky wrote:
I highly recommend this blog post by Jay Fields:
http://blog.jayfields.com/2009/02/thoughts-on-developer-testing.html
Cheers,
David
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspe
I'm trying to set up and run a new form builder under rails, which lives
under the helpers directory, but isn't really a helper. (Not a module, so
doesn't mix in well)
Short of dropping down into a view spec, how do I set up to actually spec
the form builder?
describe RandomFormBuilder do
attr
On 4-feb-2009, at 19:49, Tom Hoen wrote:
According to this documentation
(http://gitrdoc.com/brynary/webrat/tree/master/classes/Webrat/
Scope.html)
there should be a set_hidden_field method. But the method no longer
appears to be in the webrat/core/scope.rb file
Probably because it didn't a
On Feb 4, 10:22 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Brad wrote:
> > I have a controller spec that works find with Rails 2.2.2 and Rspec-
> > Rails 1.1.11. The code is:
>
> > �...@activity=mock_model(Activity, :id => 7)
> > Activity.stub!(:get).with("7").and_return(@ac
I like this line:
Today's testing patterns are like beta software. The patterns have
been tested internally, but are rarely proven in the wild. As such,
the patterns will sometimes work given the right context, and other
times they will shit the bed.
So true, so hard to explain, so well p
On 5 Feb 2009, at 11:00, aslak hellesoy wrote:
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Matt Wynne
wrote:
Since upgrading to Cucumber 0.1.99.19 I've noticed that the
backtraces
appearing in the console output are of the form:
Page load was not successful (Code: 500):
Followed by the dump of th
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
> Since upgrading to Cucumber 0.1.99.19 I've noticed that the backtraces
> appearing in the console output are of the form:
>
>Page load was not successful (Code: 500):
>
> Followed by the dump of the rails error page. That page looks fine in
Data before is nothing. I'm not sure why there's data after.
I would clear the data before running Cucumber, but after running specs by
doing a "rake db:reset" or similar, but it has no effect, because that's the
same task that started off the whole thing. I'm running this under
CruiseControl and
Since upgrading to Cucumber 0.1.99.19 I've noticed that the backtraces
appearing in the console output are of the form:
Page load was not successful (Code: 500):
Followed by the dump of the rails error page. That page looks fine in
a browser, and it's helpful enough to see it when save_a
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 1:43 AM, Christopher Bailey wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 12:54 PM, aslak hellesoy
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Christopher Bailey
>> wrote:
>> > I've been battling the strangest behavior, and hoping someone can shed
>> > some
>> > light...
>> > I am us
> Have you considered using Cucumber rather than RSpec as the driver to
> run these tests?
TBH, I haven't really looked at Cucumber much, as I'm just getting
started with Rspec itself. My impression though was that Cucumber
replaced the story runner and the way my tests are structured just
seem
I don't use fixtures or have any anywhere.
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 11:32 PM, Mark Wilden wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Christopher Bailey
> wrote:
>
>>
>> My primary residual concern is that the DB isn't clean after the specs
>> run, which means it's not clean for the features/Cucumb
24 matches
Mail list logo
