Curtis, hey man, I saw your post in the rspec list archives
(http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/2013-August/021811.html). I use
context with pattern A:
describe UsersController do
describe POST create do
it creates a user do
...
end
context with bad data do
it
On Friday, June 22, 2012 3:34:51 AM UTC-6, Joshua Muheim wrote:
Hey everybody
I came here through the RSpec Book, so I grant myself to ask something
about Cucumber here. ;)
I'm still very new to the topic and read a lot of different opinions
about how to do great Cucumber scenarios.
On Dec 22, 2011, at 12:33 PM, LeeQ leequare...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah, I see what you are saying. But no, I still want the exception to act
like an exception. My problem is that I'll have a test fail for reasons
unknown, and I then I need to open the test logs to find the exception. I'd
On Dec 19, 2011, at 11:00 AM, Ants Pants wrote:
This could just be my lack of knowledge of how Rails works but from the
following code in my RSpec test
$stderr.puts BEFORE:
#{@invitation.meeting.event.event_type.event_type_time_units.inspect}
Can you please share your RSpec code
On Dec 7, 2011, at 1:57 AM, Nikolay Sturm wrote:
* David Chelimsky [2011-12-07]:
reading Growing Object-Oriented Software, guided by tests, I came
across the distinction of class, role and responsibility.
While classes are classes and responsibilities could be mapped to public
methods, I
On Nov 14, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Patrick J. Collins wrote:
Can anyone suggest a better way?
Really tough to follow that example, so apologies if I'm off.
I use the template method pattern for stuff like this. My shared example group
references a method that isn't implemented. Example groups that
On Nov 3, 2011, at 4:07 PM, Patrick J. Collins wrote:
So, I am writing tests for a presenter class that outputs html markup.
Actually now that I am thinking about it.. Would you guys recommend that I
use
something like Nokogiri to parse the content and test for things like number
of
Yes it's by design, no you cannot circumvent it. What you can do is use mocks
to avoid expensive DB hits, or have multiple expectations in a single example.
Pat
p.s. This is Ruby, so you absolutely *can* circumvent it. How to do that and
whether it's worth the trouble is up to you to figure
On Oct 12, 2011, at 4:59 PM, Patrick J. Collins wrote:
... But I just tried doing this in RSpec with before :each, and it seems that
my @foo ivar is non existant inside the inner context.. Is this the way
it's supposed to be?
post the whole example
On Oct 11, 2011, at 5:22 PM, Patrick J. Collins wrote:
Having a spec that does:
@my_model.alert_flag?.should be_true
Seemed a little goofy to me... So I did:
You can do
@my_model.should be_alert_flag
A custom matcher isn't worth it in this case, in my opinion.
Pat
https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/docs/example-groups/shared-examples
On Sep 26, 2011, at 2:11 PM, Patrick J. Collins wrote:
I've got many models that have this declared:
has_many :notifications, :as = :notifiable, :dependent = :destroy
... And so I have many model specs such
I use spec/support or Rails.root/bdd_support
not a big deal really. just pick a place and require em
On Sep 21, 2011, at 7:35 PM, Patrick J. Collins wrote:
Hi,
I have some helper methods such as:
def mock_omniauth
OmniAuth.config.test_mode = true
OmniAuth.config.mock_auth[:facebook]
On Aug 2, 2011, at 4:41 PM, Piter Fcbk wrote:
I have a task that runs frequently in order to get/import data from another
system.
Because of this I wanted to know which is the best way to test tasks in order
to create the tests needed.
Thanks in advance.
I write simple objects that
On Jun 12, 2011, at 10:52 AM, Patrick J. Collins wrote:
What do you mean by on target? Are you asking if the implementations are
the same, or similar? Or are you asking if attest meets the same goals as
RSpec?
More specifically, I meant the way he implements describe blocks and the
should
On Apr 28, 2011, at 4:37 PM, David Kahn wrote:
I am a bit new to mocking. I am trying to stub the
ActiveMerchant::Billing::PaypalGateway#authorize method but not clear how to
do it. This is my code and spec.
This is the pertinent code:
module Payment
def gateway
On Apr 3, 2011, at 8:24 AM, andyl wrote:
I am using rspec/aruba to do integration tests of a command-line program i'm
writing.
I'd like to use something like FakeWeb to stub the network calls in the
command-line program.
But with aruba, the program under test runs in a separate
On Apr 2, 2011, at 6:20 AM, Kai Schlamp wrote:
I use RSpec mock and stub like this:
hit = mock(hit, :stored = 5)
This works fine, but when using this instead:
hit = mock(hit).stub(:stored) { 5 }
Not that it's really necessary, but to make this work you can do:
hit = mock('hit').tap
What do you mean that it's leaking into the other test? If you have
transactions turned on, then any records inserted into the db will be removed
for the next test.
My guess is that other tests just don't set up the required data...which is a
problem with ActiveRecord callbacks and observers.
Use mocks to define your interface, not to define TCPSocket directly. I would
suggest running a TCP server just to test your wrapping object.
Pat
On Mar 30, 2011, at 9:34 AM, Curtis j Schofield wrote:
I am designing a test around a class that interacts with TCPSocket - I
have used a mock
On Mar 20, 2011, at 9:38 PM, andyl wrote:
OK - I got this working using mocha and the 'any_instance' method.
A gist with working examples is here: https://gist.github.com/879029
It looks like rspec mocks had an 'any_instance' method, but it was removed
because it promoted 'bad
On Mar 22, 2011, at 6:50 PM, Radhesh Kamath wrote:
Hi experts,
I am trying to test routing in my application, where all routes are
enclosed in a namespace like so:
scope 'v1' do
resource :blah end
collection do
something
end
end
end
Is there a clean way to set 'v1'
On Mar 19, 2011, at 2:32 PM, Mobyye wrote:
I'm trying to post to my controller in RSPEC by doing:
it should store create an IncomingMail record do
lambda {
post :create,
:from = 'xx',
:to = 'xx',
:cc = 'xx',
:subject = 'xx',
On Feb 24, 2011, at 6:09 PM, Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Ross Kaffenberger rossk...@gmail.com wrote:
Anyone have rspec-2 working with rails 2.3.x? We're looking at this route as
an incremental step towards upgrading to rails 3.
I saw David C mention in the rpec-2
cattr_accessor, class vars / class instance vars, constants, globals...all
things that maintain state across test runs, and so could lead to errors like
this. I'd start looking there.
Pat
On Feb 24, 2011, at 9:55 AM, Fearless Fool wrote:
I'm baffled. If I do:
$ bundle exec ruby -S
I load my XML docs into a hash using Hash#from_xml and then compare the hashes.
On Jan 26, 2011, at 7:26 AM, Matt Wynne m...@mattwynne.net wrote:
I have a problem. I have a test that needs to assert that one XML document
looks exactly like another XML document.
I couldn't find a way to
On Jan 27, 2011, at 6:53 PM, Rick DeNatale rick.denat...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 6:16 PM, David Chelimsky dchelim...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 27, 2011, at 5:11 PM, John Feminella wrote:
That's not quite right. :each runs before _each_ spec, while :all runs
once, before _any_
On Jan 18, 2011, at 2:30 PM, Wilker wrote:
Yeah, unfortunately I'm not receiving too much feedback about it for now, so,
I'm just using for myself and trying to make it better. I will try to spread
more and more the idea, so make more people wanna try it, its a different
concept and I mean
Yeah 'spec/*' is RSpec 1.x and 'rspec/*' is RSpec 2.x. The stuff you're seeing
on the web is referring to RSpec 1.x.
On Jan 18, 2011, at 9:44 PM, Katrina Owen wrote:
That sounds suspiciously like something on your system thinks it is
RSpec 1.x whereas something else thinks it's RSpec 2.x.
Why don't functional specs count towards your coverage metric? It sounds like
you're shooting for 100% unit test coverage -- why? If you write code in order
to make your functional specs pass, then that code was TDD'd...right?
Pat
On Dec 10, 2010, at 2:29 PM, Andrew Wagner
Sounds like a validation failure. My guess is that you're re-using the
factory-created record's attributes, and your example fails because of a
uniqueness validation. This would explain the rollback if you're using the
create! or save! method.
Pat
On Dec 13, 2010, at 3:08 PM, djangst
Try assigns(:correspondence) instead. If that doesn't work, I would inspect the
value of @job.correspondences.build (when run in the test). It's possible that
stub_model is causing #build to return nil -- I don't remember the behavior off
the top of my head and don't have a Ruby available to
mock.should_receive(:write).with(\n).ordered
Append .ordered as above
On Dec 17, 2010, at 6:12 AM, niku -E:) n...@niku.name wrote:
Hello.
My name is niku.
I'm using rspec 2.2.1
/tmp% rspec --version
2.2.1
I tested http://gist.github.com/744935 and passed.
/tmp% rspec
On Dec 7, 2010, at 8:40 PM, Shea Levy wrote:
Hi all,
I'm new to RSpec and to TDD/Agile methods in general (by new I mean I'm
about 4/5 of the way through The RSpec Book and haven't yet actually
implemented the practices in my projects), so this question may seem silly.
Suppose I'm using
On Dec 6, 2010, at 4:29 AM, Dean wrote:
I'm completely new to RSpec (and fairly new to Rails, too.) I'm
working on an existing application that has an Admin::BaseController
and sub-controllers such as Admin:TestimonialsController:
class Admin::BaseController ApplicationController
end
On Oct 19, 2010, at 12:56 AM, Oscar Del Ben wrote:
I'm having some troubles understanding how to test a couple of things.
Usually, if I'm having trouble testing something, it means that my design
could probably be improved or changed, but in these cases I think I'm doing
the right thing.
search this page for shared example groups http://rspec.info/documentation/
On Sep 20, 2010, at 12:07 PM, Gene Angelo wrote:
I assume spec tests be repeated for derived classes?
Is there such a thing in rspec as deriving specs?
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Lille wrote:
Hi,
I seek to authenticate and then test other routing in RSpec, but the
standard RSpec vernacular...
describe SomeController do
it blah-blah do
get :new
...
end
end
...doesn't seem to allow me to post my login data, as in the following
pseudo-code:
describe
What does gem list rspec show? And echo $PATH ?
On Aug 10, 2010, at 9:17 AM, Brad Pauly wrote:
I've just uninstalled all versions of rspec and installed
rspec-2.0.0.beta.19 and rspec-rails-2.0.0.beta.19 for a rails project
and I can't find the rspec command. Based on what bundler is telling
On May 14, 2010, at 8:09 AM, Daniel Salmeron Amselem wrote:
Hi,
I have a problem when testing the deletion of a record from the
database. I am using RSpec methods to check if my account object is
being destroyed.
The factory creates an account object and saves it into the DB. Also
the
Could you share a bit more about what you are actually trying to achieve?
On Apr 28, 2010, at 1:51 PM, Ryan S wrote:
describe Test do
after(:each) do
if ERRORS #execute custom code here
end
it should explode do
#Test.explode -- fizzle
Test.explode.should == KABOOM
end
(where SRP violations are pretty much built-in).
They just make your test suite a bit slower, limit reuse, etc... things that
are valuable to us but typically not as valuable as just shipping.
Pat
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Pat Maddox mailingli...@patmaddox.com
wrote:
Cucumber
On Apr 22, 2010, at 9:57 AM, Zach Moazeni wrote:
I'll jump in here as I was one of the guys who presented a shift in my
testing strategies at the Great Lakes Ruby Bash.
To give some context, I've built projects that were very focused on isolation
tests that used Rspec and Mocks to assert
Put the interesting bits in a basic Ruby class and test that, then make the
Rake tasks a very thin layer over the class.
On Apr 19, 2010, at 8:46 AM, Rick DeNatale wrote:
I released a new gem this past weekend which adds a new rake task for
Jeweler to generate a release announcement.
I
On Apr 14, 2010, at 12:28 PM, rogerdpack wrote:
I remember reading a post where somebody mentioned something like
sometimes after a refactoring, a test block like
lambda { ... }.should raise_error
catches a NoMethodError in error, thus is actually failing, but the
user isn't
Sounds like a lot of work
On Apr 3, 2010, at 9:08 PM, Julian Leviston wrote:
Sorry I meant send AND __send__
Julian.
On 04/04/2010, at 11:45 AM, Julian Leviston wrote:
On 04/04/2010, at 7:32 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Vojto Rinik zero0...@gmail.com
On Mar 30, 2010, at 7:23 AM, George wrote:
When you need to check several properties of an object, what is the
best way to match them all?
I'm using the 'satisfy' matcher at the moment but perhaps there's a
better way than this:
flight.should satisfy { |f|
f.booking_code
Not I, but let me know if you come across anything please. Sounds interesting.
On Mar 24, 2010, at 12:36 PM, Peter Fitzgibbons wrote:
HI Folks,
Roll Call for anyone using Rspec for Ruby Game Development (Rubygame, GOSU,
TkRuby, etc.) ???
I'm having trouble finding the
I've never heard of CurbFu, but according to
http://github.com/gdi/curb-fu/blob/master/lib/curb-fu.rb#L43 it defines a stub
method already. So you're hitting that one, which expects two arguments.
stub! goes to RSpec's mocking framework.
Pat
On Mar 19, 2010, at 10:00 AM, Nick Hoffman
On Mar 3, 2010, at 5:26 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 2:16 AM, vtr thiyagaraja...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi All,
This is Thiyagarajan Veluchamy from India, i am new to rspec. gI need
to learn rspec. Can anyone guide me, how to start properly.
Advance Thanks,
Hi
I just use a factory method.
describe 'Authorize.net CIM gateway', :shared = true do
describe 'saving a card' do
describe 'preconditions' do
it should raise an error if the card is not saved do
lambda {
gateway.save_credit_card(Factory.build(:credit_card, :user =
From a mocking / stubbing perspective, how is this different from
Article.all(:conditions = ['published_at = ?', Time.now], :include =
:comments)
?
i.e. in both cases wouldn't you do
class Article
def self.active_published
all :conditions = ['published_at = ?', Time.now], :include =
Extract redirect logic to an object or helper and test that.
UrlRewriter.new.rewrite('/foods/search/almonds').should == '/almonds'
helper.rewrite_url('/foods/search/almonds').should == '/almonds'
and then you will see that this should probably be called higher up in the call
stack, in a
Look in spec/spec_helper.rb for the configuration block, and hook up your
custom stuff there:
Spec::Runner.configured do |config|
config.before(:each) { AfterFixturesLoaded.custom_stuff1 }
config.after(:each) { AfterFixturesLoaded.custom_stuff1 }
end
Pat
On Feb 16, 2010, at 8:48 AM, Ben
Please provide more context. There should be a stack trace that tells you at
which line the error occurs.
This problem typically occurs when you have a method that calls itself and has
no return mechanism. Sometimes that can be a sloppily implemented
method_missing.
I can't see anything
exactamundo
On Jan 20, 2010, at 7:27 AM, Corey Haines wrote:
Is something like this what you were thinking of?
http://gist.github.com/281907
On Jan 18, 2010, at 9:31 am, Pat Maddox wrote:
define_simple_predicate_matcher :rise_from_the_ashes?
As an extension, how about
On Jan 15, 2010, at 6:19 AM, Ashley Moran wrote:
On 14 Jan 2010, at 17:02, Rick DeNatale wrote:
-1
You can already say
a.should include(1:4)
which is clearer IMHO.
I assume Roger was referring to the general case though (which I still don't
like) - and just happened to pick
class User ActiveRecord::Base
named_scope :admins, :conditions = {:admin = true}
end
describe User, admins do
it should include users with admin flag do
admin = User.create! :admin = true
User.admin.should include(admin)
end
it should not include users without admin flag do
On Jan 18, 2010, at 7:12 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Ashley Moran
ashley.mo...@patchspace.co.uk wrote:
On Jan 18, 2010, at 9:31 am, Pat Maddox wrote:
define_simple_predicate_matcher :rise_from_the_ashes?
As an extension, how about
I use resource_controller, and then don't need to write controller specs
because it's all boiler-plate. If I add any custom behavior that needs more
focused testing than cucumber provides, I can just write a couple specs to
cover it.
Pat
On Jan 4, 2010, at 11:16 AM, Nicolás Sanguinetti
On Dec 22, 2009, at 2:08 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 9:33 AM, rogerdpack rogerpack2...@gmail.com wrote:
raise_error already catches any type of exception, error or not:
class BlahException Exception; end
class BlahError StandardError; end
lambda { raise
http://archive.patmaddox.com/blog/2009/1/15/how-i-test-controllers-2009-remix
is my take on things. Due for an update though looks like :)
On Dec 16, 2009, at 8:56 AM, Stefan Kanev wrote:
Hey guys.
I switched completely to RSpec and Cucumber this spring and I am really happy
with. While
[...@admin, @allowed_user].should all(be_allowed_to_visit(url))
[...@admin, @allowed_user].should all_be_allowed_to_visit(url)
I prefer the first so as not to introduce more magic but if it catches on
then moving to the second might be worthwhile.
Pat
On Dec 9, 2009, at 5:27 AM, David
Pair with them. How big's the team? Lots of ways you can do this.
If there are 5 other devs, you can pair with one each day, bam,
training in a week. If there are 10, you pair with 5 for one week,
then have those guys pair with the other guys over the next week
(rotating every day). Does
Already in.
[1,2].should =~ [2,1]
Pat
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas
lboc...@yahoo.com.br wrote:
How about having this matcher along the default available matchers?
require 'set'
Spec::Matchers.define :have_same_elements_of do |expected|
match do |actual|
Break your object up. It's too big.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:36 PM, Joaquin Rivera Padron
joahk...@gmail.com wrote:
hello there,
how do you tipically spec private methods? The thing is Ï have something
like this:
def some_method
complex_method + other_complex_methods
end
private
wait why do you want to do this?? Just use a regular hash and do
state-based assertions on it. Or determine the role that this
hash-like thing is doing, and use a mock to define a proper interface.
Ashley's solution works but I am very skeptical that the approach is
a good one. Can you post
user = mock('user')
controller.stub(:current_user).and_return user
friendships_proxy = mock('friendships proxy')
user.stub(:friendships).and_return friendships_proxy
friendship = mock('friendship')
friendhips_proxy.stub(:build).and_return friendship
Try to avoid chains like this. Makes the test
Is this all of the code, or did you remove some stuff? I copied the
code in a new rails app and the test passed. What versions of rspec
rspec-rails are you running?
Pat
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 5:23 AM, Alexander Seidl li...@ruby-forum.com wrote:
http://pastie.org/pastes/661816
hi,
please
Response written as I go through the slides, and late at night under
sleep deprivation ;)
* 57 juicy slides in half an hour? Damn dude.
* Not a fan of the defining an interface service example. A single
method named #query that accepts a string that appears to have the
real command is not much
or check out fixjour (http://github.com/nakajima/fixjour/) which is
better imo because it has a better API and fewer surprises
(associations in factory girl always confuse me)
Pat
On Mon, Oct 5, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Mithun Perera li...@ruby-forum.com wrote:
Hi
please any body can help me to learn
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Scott Taylor sc...@railsnewbie.com wrote:
On Oct 12, 2009, at 9:14 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Oct 12, 2009, at 9:37 PM, Sam Woodard wrote:
I have an interesting setup: I am using rspec for mocking but I have
mocha installed which give me access to
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 6:56 AM, Alexander Seidl li...@ruby-forum.com wrote:
I started a new test: Have a look at my new code:
http://pastie.org/663455
1) The categories_controller is NOT called from the test!
2) I created another example with a message_controller and associated
tests.
On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 3:58 AM, Alexander Seidl li...@ruby-forum.com wrote:
hi pat,
thats all of the code that will be executed in
categories_controller_spec.rb. the rest is commented out.
Looks like this may be the same issue as the other thread. You didn't
show all the code, because
If your controllers are fat, test in isolation. For skinny
controllers I will sometimes forgo controller specs altogether and
implicitly verify the integration through cucumber features.
Sometimes there's something funky that makes the cucumber failure
output difficult to interpret, and
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Sarah Allensa...@ultrasaurus.com wrote:
I find that testing views independently is useful just to catch HTML errors
that can sometime creep in during a re-factor. These check important
details that would be more tedious using cucumber
+1
Pat
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Sebastian W. li...@ruby-forum.com wrote:
Hello all,
Is there a way to explicitly tell a mock to expect no messages and give
an error if it does? I believe this is the default behavior, but thought
it might be nice for code readers to see.
Document it in the
You can put expectations in your before block, and that'll give you
the behavior you want.
before(:each) do
@org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty(root)
@org_root_prop.should_not be_nil
@org_root_prop.trim.should_not be_empty
end
If either of those expectations fail then the
Let's say I've got this spec:
describe Team, add_player do
it should add a player to the team do
team = Team.new
player = Player.new :name = Pat
team.add_player player
team.should have(1).players
team.players.first.name.should == Pat
end
end
and for some reason
(on System.getProperty in this case)?
Arthur Smith
Pat Maddox wrote:
You can put expectations in your before block, and that'll give you
the behavior you want.
before(:each) do
@org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty(root)
@org_root_prop.should_not be_nil
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Zach Dennis zach.den...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 1:57 PM, BJ Clark b...@aboutus.org wrote:
Fernando,
They are easier to spec with Pat Maddox's no peeping toms plugin.
http://github.com/pat-maddox/no-peeping-toms/tree/master
I use Pat's
Don't mock the Geolp library directly. Wrap it with an API that fits
your domain better. Then write a very simple object that implements
the same API but doesn't hit the network. You can use a switch
somewhere in env.rb to use your fake implementation or the Geolp one.
Pat
On Sunday, May 3,
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:18 PM, David Chelimsky dchelim...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:09 PM, James Byrne li...@ruby-forum.com wrote:
David Chelimsky wrote:
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:45 PM, James Byrne li...@ruby-forum.com
wrote:
this worked:
I am not throwing out RSpec or
On Sat, Apr 18, 2009 at 3:09 AM, svoop sv...@delirium.ch wrote:
Pat Maddox pat.mad...@... writes:
Okay I must be dense because I'm not sure what you mean by it gets in
the way of refactoring.
Actually, scratch that, because...
And you're right about how it behaves...that's exactly how
What is the thing that's being done in a callback and also sometimes
called by clients? Usually the semantics are different and you don't
want to treat them exactly the same...
At any rate, you can be creative with shared example groups to get rid
of the duplication. Something like
describe
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 10:43 AM, svoop sv...@delirium.ch wrote:
Hi
I'm not sure what would be best practise to treat this case.
Migration:
t.boolean :fetched, :null = false, :default = false
Model:
validates_inclusion_of :fetched, :in = [true, false]
Spec:
it do
article =
On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 1:15 PM, svoop sv...@delirium.ch wrote:
What do you mean by it blocks refactorings? This isn't any different
from the first example, with the exception that you provide a value
instead of letting the default kick in...
article = Article.new
article.fetched # =
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:17 AM, David Chelimsky dchelim...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Salil Gaikwad li...@ruby-forum.com wrote:
How to write a spec file for a following helper
module ArtistsHelper
def round_to(x)
(self * 10**x).round.to_f / 10**x
end
end
in
On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Phlip phlip2...@gmail.com wrote:
My current day-job's most important project has a test suite that suffered
from abuse of that concept. The original team, without enough refactoring
Would you have called it abuse were the tests well-factored? I don't
think it
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 8:49 AM, Lenny Marks le...@aps.org wrote:
On Apr 10, 2009, at 12:51 AM, Ben Mabey wrote:
Gavin Hughes wrote:
Then I should be on /users/3/posts/8/comments/2/edit
What's the solution for parsing out and matching and arbitrarily deep
nested route?
Hi Gavin,
Let me
On Fri, Apr 10, 2009 at 9:40 AM, Pat Maddox pat.mad...@gmail.com wrote:
I would just test that at the controller level
I would _specify_ that at the controller level.
BAD BDD evangelist :P
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http
I'm not sure, cause I've never tried to write a step like that.
I would rather do
Then I should see Editing 'My sweet comment'
Even better would be to actually edit the comment and make sure that
it changed. So maybe
When I edit the comment to be My new comment
Then I should see My new comment
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 2:19 PM, aslak hellesoy aslak.helle...@gmail.com wrote:
Ben Mabey has accepted my invitation to be on the core Cucumber team.
Ben has been a long time contributor to Cucumber's ecosystem and knows it
inside out.
Here is a quote from IRC today:
mabes: Yeah but you're
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 10:32 AM, James B. Byrne byrn...@harte-lyne.ca wrote:
I have run into a minor glitch and would like to know what others
think. I am working on a test/expectation and as part of the
process of debugging I am rolling back db:migrations one step at a
time to discover
The rspec gem did install successfully, not sure what those doc
warnings are. Did you install rspec-rails as well?
Pat
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 4:08 PM, Mike Williams li...@ruby-forum.com wrote:
Hello,
Just purchased my first mac for Ruby on Rails development and I'm in the
process of setting
That's basically what I do. http://gist.github.com/82981 shows one I
wrote a couple days ago. I yield each object because there are like
400k records and I can't keep them in memory. Might be a little nicer
to yield the params hash and let the caller build the object, but I
don't need that
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 8:42 PM, David Chelimsky dchelim...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Stephen Eley sfe...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/3/19 Rick DeNatale rick.denat...@gmail.com:
Even 'should be' is a bit grating. I'm tempted to write a pair of matchers
like be_truthy and
I think, if it is not already on the wiki, that cucumber users might be
encouraged to put any local additions to support/env.rb into a separate
file like support/local_env.rb. Running script/generate cucumber to
upgrade an existing project leaves those with customized env.rb files
with two
Right, you need to add
require 'spec/expectations'
because Cucumber doesn't know about RSpec's matchers by default.
Pat
2009/3/19 Yi hayafi...@gmail.com:
This is my env.rb
# Sets up the Rails environment for Cucumber
ENV[RAILS_ENV] ||= test
require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) +
On Mar 18, 2009, at 5:03 AM, Harm wrote:
This works by the grace that my routes file has a fallback map.connect
':controller/:action/:id'. I never use that fallback only for this
particular test. Is there anyway to get rid of this entry in my
routes.rb?
map.connect ':controller/:action/:id'
On Mar 17, 2009, at 11:37 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
2009/3/18 Tom Meier t...@zudio.com.au:
With the above settings when our specs run (while on rails 2.3 and
rspec
1.2), the following error occurs :
undefined method `mock_model=' for #User:0x2d5887c
The error says mock_model=, which
1 - 100 of 500 matches
Mail list logo
