Just curious if this was ever fixed??
On Jul 13, 2010, at 8:49 PM, Arco wrote:
> In a recent blog post, David wrote:
> Because RSpec is the test framework of record, Rails doesn’t know to
> hide the test_unit generators. If you want to hide them, just add this
> to one of your config files:
>
On Nov 2, 2010, at 1:54 PM, Mack T. wrote:
> Rspec-2 around/before(:all) hooks
>
> I'm trying to create several model instances before all of our tests are
> run. I'm having trouble defining the behavior in my Rspec.configure
> block. I've tried before(:all) and around(:all), but to no avail.
I'm under the weather so I won't be able to give you a thorough
answer.
#let - The block is executed when you call it.
#let! - The block is "wrapped" in a before(:each) filter.
So, you want to use #let!
On Nov 2, 7:55 pm, Nadal wrote:
> Here is my test which passes.
>
> before do
> @
Here is my test which passes.
before do
@page = Factory(:page)
@note = Factory(:note, :page => @page, :title => 'super cool')
end
it 'has size 1' do
@page.notes.size.should == 1
end
I read rspec book and wanted to use let. Here is my implementation.
A
Rspec-2 around/before(:all) hooks
I'm trying to create several model instances before all of our tests are
run. I'm having trouble defining the behavior in my Rspec.configure
block. I've tried before(:all) and around(:all), but to no avail.
before(:all) successfully creates the models, but it a
> To me, checking whether the attribute changed is more straight-forward
> than implementing a custom matcher, at least at my current level of
> experience (novice) with rails and rspec.
Okay, so that didn't last very long. Suddenly, I was swimming in very
repetitive code in my _spec files...I cou
> I suppose I need to be careful that the attribute change was rejected
> for some other reason (bad data, for example). But that's true of any
> example/test.
Good catch, that's why I think the Shoulda approach makes sense (since
otherwise you're duplicating the Rails test suite which is supposed
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Iain E. Davis
wrote:
> I failed to mention I'm using Rails 2.3.8 and Rspec-1.3.x. I should
> have said that right away.
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 01:33, Alexey Ilyichev wrote:
>> An attempt to assign protected attributes leads to the warning in your log
> Hmm...
I failed to mention I'm using Rails 2.3.8 and Rspec-1.3.x. I should
have said that right away.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 01:33, Alexey Ilyichev wrote:
> An attempt to assign protected attributes leads to the warning in your log
Hmm... Maybe I should actually look at the log once in a while...
>
On 02/11/2010, at 01:36, Iain E. Davis wrote:
> I've been puzzling over how to test that attr_accessible has been set
> for the correct columns; but the tests I've come up with so far seem
> to fail to fail when I expect. I came across this old message from
> this list:
>
> http://www.mail-archiv
update_attributes [1] doesn't raise any exception when you try to
assign the attribute which is protected with
`attr_accessible/attr_protected` machinery (only warning in log is
printed).
So your options are:
1. perform update_attributes for an attribute and then assert that the
attribute didn't c
An attempt to assign protected attributes leads to the warning in your log
and not doing actual assignment.
You can test it like this:
describe Article, 'protected attributes' do
it 'should deny mass-assignment to the user_id' do
RAILS_DEFAULT_LOGGER.should_receive(:warn) # I ain't sure if i
12 matches
Mail list logo
