[Chirb] tools, already in play and coming soon

David Chelimsky dchelimsky at gmail.com
Fri Jun 20 09:43:52 EDT 2008 

Any chance you can give us the 5 line "here's what you do" in the mean  
time? We *are* on pins and needles.

On Jun 20, 2008, at 7:49 AM, Ryan Platte wrote:

> I'm sorry to keep everybody on pins and needles, I simply don't have  
> leisure time to work up a blog post on this right now, and I'm not  
> sure when I will. Apologies to all.
>
> On Jun 19, 2008, at 10:36 PM, Jake Scruggs wrote:
>> yep, at
>> http://jakescruggs.blogspot.com/2008/06/disconnecting-rspec-from-database.html
>>
>> I mostly just talk about my experiences with NullDB and call out  
>> Ryan to talk about UnitRecord.
>> -Jake
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 6:14 PM, Nate Kirby <natebkirby at yahoo.com>  
>> wrote:
>> Jake,
>>
>> Did this blogging ever take place?  I am also quite interested.
>>
>> Does UnitRecord play nice with Story Runner?
>>
>> Blessings,
>> Nate
>>
>> Ryan Platte wrote:
>>>
>>> Go for it, Jake. I'm interested to see what you'll write.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 7:23 PM, Jake Scruggs <jake.scruggs at gmail.com 
>>> > wrote:
>>> I haven't had any problems with NullDB, but failing silently is  
>>> its thing (Null Object Pattern and all) so be careful.  I think  
>>> the tagging bit you describe as coming soon to RSpec is pretty cool.
>>>
>>> I'm probably going to blog about this soon and will quote some  
>>> things from Ryan and David's responses -- unless of course either  
>>> of you object.
>>> -Jake
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:08 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com 
>>> > wrote:
>>> Hey Jake - thanks for sharing this. Couple o' comments below:
>>>
>>> On Jun 11, 2008, at 9:26 AM, Jake Scruggs wrote:
>>>> I've been using the NullDb (http://agilewebdevelopment.com/plugins/nulldb 
>>>> ) plugin to disconnect RSpec from the database.
>>>
>>> The only drawback I've heard about NullDb is that it fails  
>>> silently in certain cases - has led to some painful debugging.  
>>> Have you had that experience?
>>>
>>>> I don't like the global disconnect (for all specs everywhere)  
>>>> that the web page suggests, so I set up this in my spec_helper:
>>>>
>>>> describe "Unit Spec", :shared => true do
>>>>   before :all do
>>>>     ActiveRecord::Base.establish_connection(:adapter => :nulldb)
>>>>   end
>>>>
>>>>   after :all do
>>>>     ActiveRecord::Base.establish_connection(:test)
>>>>   end
>>>> end
>>>>
>>>> and then say this inside any describe block I want to disconnect  
>>>> from the db:
>>>>
>>>> require File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/../spec_helper"
>>>>
>>>> describe User do
>>>>   it_should_behave_like "Unit Spec"
>>>
>>> This is cool that it works, but using it_should_behave_like feels  
>>> odd to me in this case. The User should not behave like a Unit  
>>> Spec, the examples should be disconnected.
>>>
>>> You can do this instead if you like:
>>>
>>> share_as :Disconnected do
>>>
>>>   before :all do
>>>     ActiveRecord::Base.establish_connection(:adapter => :nulldb)
>>>   end
>>>
>>>   after :all do
>>>     ActiveRecord::Base.establish_connection(:test)
>>>   end
>>> end
>>>
>>> describe User do
>>>   include Disconnected
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Right now we don't have an arbitrary tagging mechanism but it's  
>>> something we've talked about. This gives me an idea that I'd like  
>>> to implement, and everything is pretty much in place to support  
>>> this, where the options hash is available to you in the before and  
>>> after blocks, so you could do this (CAREFUL - THIS DOES NOT WORK  
>>> TODAY):
>>>
>>> Spec::Runner.configure do |config|
>>>   config.before(:all)
>>>     if example_group_options[:disconnected]
>>>       ActiveRecord::Base.establish_connection(:adapter => :nulldb)
>>>     end
>>>   end
>>>   config.after(:all)
>>>     if example_group_options[:disconnected]
>>>       ActiveRecord::Base.establish_connection(:test)
>>>     end
>>>   end
>>> end
>>>
>>> Then you'd be able to say:
>>>
>>> describe User, :disconnected => true do
>>>   ...
>>>
>>> WDYT about that?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> using nested describes to separate my unit (don't hit the db)  
>>>> from my functional (do hit the db) specs
>>>>
>>>> -Jake
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 8:37 AM, Ryan Platte <ryan at platte.name>  
>>>> wrote:
>>>> Here are some Rake tasks I created to use RSpec with UnitRecord.  
>>>> I set the default task to first run spec:fast, then spec:slow, so  
>>>> if the fast ones fail we don't have to wait on the slow ones to  
>>>> set up and run.
>>>>
>>>> The fly in the ointment is that schema.rb has to be current.
>>>>
>>>> namespace :spec do
>>>>
>>>>   desc "Run all fast specs in spec directory (excluding plugin  
>>>> specs)"
>>>>   Spec::Rake::SpecTask.new(:fast) do |t|
>>>>     t.spec_opts = ['--options', "\"#{RAILS_ROOT}/spec/spec.opts\""]
>>>>     t.spec_files = FileList['spec/**/*_fast_spec.rb']
>>>>     #t.ruby_opts = ['-r spec/spec_helper', '-rubygems', '- 
>>>> runit_record', "-e 'ActiveRecord::Base.disconnect!'"]
>>>>   end
>>>>
>>>>   desc "Run all non-fast specs in spec directory (excluding  
>>>> plugin specs)"
>>>>   Spec::Rake::SpecTask.new(:slow => spec_prereq) do |t|
>>>>     t.spec_opts = ['--options', "\"#{RAILS_ROOT}/spec/spec.opts\""]
>>>>     t.spec_files = FileList['spec/**/*_spec.rb'].exclude('spec/**/ 
>>>> *_fast_spec.rb')
>>>>   end
>>>>
>>>> end
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 1:36 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com 
>>>> > wrote:
>>>> On Jun 9, 2008, at 11:31 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Chirb,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lastly, I may have mis-spoke about rails loading up columns from  
>>>> schema.rb - I'm looking into it and will follow up when I learn  
>>>> the truth. So Ryan - keep using unit-record for now :)
>>>>
>>>> I definitely mis-spoke. I don't know where I got that in my head,  
>>>> but it seems I did.
>>>>
>>>> I don't recall who said it, but unit_record does the column  
>>>> caching I thought rails did. So now it's off to figure out how to  
>>>> get rspec to play nice w/ unit_record.
>>>>
>>>> More soon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> David
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
>>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Ryan Platte
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
>>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
>>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Ryan Platte
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> ChicagoGroup-Members-List at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/chicagogroup-members-list

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/chicagogroup-members-list/attachments/20080620/b3d1fd6c/attachment.html>

More information about the ChicagoGroup-Members-List mailing list