From mortench at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 06:33:00 2009
From: mortench at gmail.com (mortench)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 03:33:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
Message-ID: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>

JUnit 4.4+ has a feature called assumptions and I am looking for
something similar in rspec so that I can express that my examples
require a specific environment variable to be specified for testing to
make sense.

About assumptions from the readme (http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/
ReleaseNotes4.4.html#assumptions):
"Ideally, the developer writing a test has control of all of the
forces that might cause a test to fail. If this isn't immediately
possible, making dependencies explicit can often improve a design.
For example, if a test fails when run in a different locale than the
developer intended, it can be fixed by explicitly passing a locale to
the domain code.

However, sometimes this is not desirable or possible.
It's good to be able to run a test against the code as it is currently
written, implicit assumptions and all, or to write a test that exposes
a known bug. For these situations, JUnit now includes the ability to
express "assumptions":
"

/Morten

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 06:58:50 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 05:58:50 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:33 AM, mortench <mortench at gmail.com> wrote:
> JUnit 4.4+ has a feature called assumptions and I am looking for
> something similar in rspec so that I can express that my examples
> require a specific environment variable to be specified for testing to
> make sense.

There is no explicit support for this, but you could always just say
(taking the example from the page you cited):

def assume_that(expression)
  yield if expression
end

def verify_that(actual, expected)
  actual.should expected
end

it "should blah de blah" do
  assume_that(File::SEPARATOR == "/") do
    ensure_that User.new("optimus"), eql("configfiles/optimus.cfg")
  end
end

I am planning to add support for something like ensure_that (name up
for grabs) in a future version of rspec, but I'd need to think about
assume_that a bit. We're dealing with Ruby here, not Java, and we
don't suffer things like a 'final' keyword that force us to have to
make assumptions like this. Unless we add some additional feedback,
like "such and such example did not run due to faulty assumptions,"
this seems quite dangerous to me. And even with that, it means that CI
servers are going to pass examples that are never actually run.

HTH,
David

>
> About assumptions from the readme (http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/
> ReleaseNotes4.4.html#assumptions):
> "Ideally, the developer writing a test has control of all of the
> forces that might cause a test to fail. If this isn't immediately
> possible, making dependencies explicit can often improve a design.
> For example, if a test fails when run in a different locale than the
> developer intended, it can be fixed by explicitly passing a locale to
> the domain code.
>
> However, sometimes this is not desirable or possible.
> It's good to be able to run a test against the code as it is currently
> written, implicit assumptions and all, or to write a test that exposes
> a known bug. For these situations, JUnit now includes the ability to
> express "assumptions":
> "
>
> /Morten
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From mortench at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 07:12:39 2009
From: mortench at gmail.com (mortench)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 04:12:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>

Hi David,

Thanks for the suggestion! It indeed make sense for the Junit
example... However, my particular usage case for assumption is a bit
different. I am using jruby+jspec and I have a group of rspec examples
that all require a java property to be set for the examples to be able
to run. Besides, the examples also have an after action that will also
break if the java propety is not set. Idealy, I would like to do
something like.

before(:all) do
    @org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")

    # abort all examples and after action if condition is not meet:
    ensure_that !rootPath.nil? && rootPath.strip.length>0
end

Notice, that the assume is in a before action and not in the examples
themselves + it should affect the examples and after action (none of
which should run if before action assumptions are not meet).

/Morten


On Jun 1, 12:58?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:33 AM, mortench <morte... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > JUnit 4.4+ has a feature called assumptions and I am looking for
> > something similar in rspec so that I can express that my examples
> > require a specific environment variable to be specified for testing to
> > make sense.
>
> There is no explicit support for this, but you could always just say
> (taking the example from the page you cited):
>
> def assume_that(expression)
> ? yield if expression
> end
>
> def verify_that(actual, expected)
> ? actual.should expected
> end
>
> it "should blah de blah" do
> ? assume_that(File::SEPARATOR == "/") do
> ? ? ensure_that User.new("optimus"), eql("configfiles/optimus.cfg")
> ? end
> end
>
> I am planning to add support for something like ensure_that (name up
> for grabs) in a future version of rspec, but I'd need to think about
> assume_that a bit. We're dealing with Ruby here, not Java, and we
> don't suffer things like a 'final' keyword that force us to have to
> make assumptions like this. Unless we add some additional feedback,
> like "such and such example did not run due to faulty assumptions,"
> this seems quite dangerous to me. And even with that, it means that CI
> servers are going to pass examples that are never actually run.
>
> HTH,
> David
>
>
>
>
>
> > About assumptions from the readme (http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/
> > ReleaseNotes4.4.html#assumptions):
> > "Ideally, the developer writing a test has control of all of the
> > forces that might cause a test to fail. If this isn't immediately
> > possible, making dependencies explicit can often improve a design.
> > For example, if a test fails when run in a different locale than the
> > developer intended, it can be fixed by explicitly passing a locale to
> > the domain code.
>
> > However, sometimes this is not desirable or possible.
> > It's good to be able to run a test against the code as it is currently
> > written, implicit assumptions and all, or to write a test that exposes
> > a known bug. For these situations, JUnit now includes the ability to
> > express "assumptions":
> > "
>
> > /Morten
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-us... at rubyforge.org
> >http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From mortench at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 07:26:07 2009
From: mortench at gmail.com (mortench)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 04:26:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com> 
	<852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <320590a7-909b-410e-8eeb-3140cda4b0b5@l12g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>

Correction for last msg:

before(:all) do
    @org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")

    # abort all examples and after action if condition is not meet:
    ensure_that !@org_root_prop.nil? && @org_root_prop.strip.length>0
end

/Morten

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 09:16:23 2009
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 09:16:23 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <320590a7-909b-410e-8eeb-3140cda4b0b5@l12g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com>
	<852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
	<320590a7-909b-410e-8eeb-3140cda4b0b5@l12g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <85d99afe0906010616v71b6c7bn9aa9408a41ae8822@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 7:26 AM, mortench <mortench at gmail.com> wrote:
> Correction for last msg:
>
> before(:all) do
> ? ?@org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")
>
> ? ?# abort all examples and after action if condition is not meet:
> ? ?ensure_that !@org_root_prop.nil? && @org_root_prop.strip.length>0
> end

You could do this check outside of the example? ie:

describe "...." do
   def self.ensure_that(condition, &blk)
      yield if condition
   end

   def self.root_property_is_not_blank
     org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")
     org_root_prop.nil? && org_root_prop.strip.length>0
   end

   ensure_that root_property_is_not_blank do
      it "...." do
      end
  end
end

>
> /Morten
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>



-- 
Zach Dennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com (personal)
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com (hire me)
http://ideafoundry.info/behavior-driven-development (first rate BDD training)
@zachdennis (twitter)

From pat.maddox at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 12:51:13 2009
From: pat.maddox at gmail.com (Pat Maddox)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 09:51:13 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com>
	<852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <2c7e61990906010951w5b66ac2ei97401a07cafc970d@mail.gmail.com>

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 examples that require
that property will report failures.  If I were using this all over the
place, I would write a custom matcher.

before(:each) do
  java.lang.System.should have_property("root")
  @org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")
end

This would allow you to define your own error message and perform more
sophisticated expectations (see the have_tag/with_tag example in
rspec-rails).

Note that you should be doing this check in before(:each) because you
want it to run before each example.  Also you should be using
before(:each) 99% of the time anyway.

Pat

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 4:12 AM, mortench <mortench at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Thanks for the suggestion! It indeed make sense for the Junit
> example... However, my particular usage case for assumption is a bit
> different. I am using jruby+jspec and I have a group of rspec examples
> that all require a java property to be set for the examples to be able
> to run. Besides, the examples also have an after action that will also
> break if the java propety is not set. Idealy, I would like to do
> something like.
>
> before(:all) do
> ? ?@org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")
>
> ? ?# abort all examples and after action if condition is not meet:
> ? ?ensure_that !rootPath.nil? && rootPath.strip.length>0
> end
>
> Notice, that the assume is in a before action and not in the examples
> themselves + it should affect the examples and after action (none of
> which should run if before action assumptions are not meet).
>
> /Morten
>
>
> On Jun 1, 12:58?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:33 AM, mortench <morte... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > JUnit 4.4+ has a feature called assumptions and I am looking for
>> > something similar in rspec so that I can express that my examples
>> > require a specific environment variable to be specified for testing to
>> > make sense.
>>
>> There is no explicit support for this, but you could always just say
>> (taking the example from the page you cited):
>>
>> def assume_that(expression)
>> ? yield if expression
>> end
>>
>> def verify_that(actual, expected)
>> ? actual.should expected
>> end
>>
>> it "should blah de blah" do
>> ? assume_that(File::SEPARATOR == "/") do
>> ? ? ensure_that User.new("optimus"), eql("configfiles/optimus.cfg")
>> ? end
>> end
>>
>> I am planning to add support for something like ensure_that (name up
>> for grabs) in a future version of rspec, but I'd need to think about
>> assume_that a bit. We're dealing with Ruby here, not Java, and we
>> don't suffer things like a 'final' keyword that force us to have to
>> make assumptions like this. Unless we add some additional feedback,
>> like "such and such example did not run due to faulty assumptions,"
>> this seems quite dangerous to me. And even with that, it means that CI
>> servers are going to pass examples that are never actually run.
>>
>> HTH,
>> David
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > About assumptions from the readme (http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/
>> > ReleaseNotes4.4.html#assumptions):
>> > "Ideally, the developer writing a test has control of all of the
>> > forces that might cause a test to fail. If this isn't immediately
>> > possible, making dependencies explicit can often improve a design.
>> > For example, if a test fails when run in a different locale than the
>> > developer intended, it can be fixed by explicitly passing a locale to
>> > the domain code.
>>
>> > However, sometimes this is not desirable or possible.
>> > It's good to be able to run a test against the code as it is currently
>> > written, implicit assumptions and all, or to write a test that exposes
>> > a known bug. For these situations, JUnit now includes the ability to
>> > express "assumptions":
>> > "
>>
>> > /Morten
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rspec-users mailing list
>> > rspec-us... at rubyforge.org
>> >http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From apsmith at aps.org  Mon Jun  1 14:04:39 2009
From: apsmith at aps.org (Arthur Smith)
Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 14:04:39 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
 JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <2c7e61990906010951w5b66ac2ei97401a07cafc970d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>	<57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com>	<852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
	<2c7e61990906010951w5b66ac2ei97401a07cafc970d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A241837.9090504@aps.org>

I thought the point was we don't want the examples to be run at all, if 
the condition is not met? Though I'm wondering why not just handle 
something like this with a stub (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
>    @org_root_prop.trim.should_not be_empty
> end
>
> If either of those expectations fail then the examples that require
> that property will report failures.  If I were using this all over the
> place, I would write a custom matcher.
>
> before(:each) do
>   java.lang.System.should have_property("root")
>   @org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")
> end
>
> This would allow you to define your own error message and perform more
> sophisticated expectations (see the have_tag/with_tag example in
> rspec-rails).
>
> Note that you should be doing this check in before(:each) because you
> want it to run before each example.  Also you should be using
> before(:each) 99% of the time anyway.
>
> Pat
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 4:12 AM, mortench <mortench at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Hi David,
>>
>> Thanks for the suggestion! It indeed make sense for the Junit
>> example... However, my particular usage case for assumption is a bit
>> different. I am using jruby+jspec and I have a group of rspec examples
>> that all require a java property to be set for the examples to be able
>> to run. Besides, the examples also have an after action that will also
>> break if the java propety is not set. Idealy, I would like to do
>> something like.
>>
>> before(:all) do
>>    @org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")
>>
>>    # abort all examples and after action if condition is not meet:
>>    ensure_that !rootPath.nil? && rootPath.strip.length>0
>> end
>>
>> Notice, that the assume is in a before action and not in the examples
>> themselves + it should affect the examples and after action (none of
>> which should run if before action assumptions are not meet).
>>
>> /Morten
>>
>>
>> On Jun 1, 12:58 pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:33 AM, mortench <morte... at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> JUnit 4.4+ has a feature called assumptions and I am looking for
>>>> something similar in rspec so that I can express that my examples
>>>> require a specific environment variable to be specified for testing to
>>>> make sense.
>>>>         
>>> There is no explicit support for this, but you could always just say
>>> (taking the example from the page you cited):
>>>
>>> def assume_that(expression)
>>>   yield if expression
>>> end
>>>
>>> def verify_that(actual, expected)
>>>   actual.should expected
>>> end
>>>
>>> it "should blah de blah" do
>>>   assume_that(File::SEPARATOR == "/") do
>>>     ensure_that User.new("optimus"), eql("configfiles/optimus.cfg")
>>>   end
>>> end
>>>
>>> I am planning to add support for something like ensure_that (name up
>>> for grabs) in a future version of rspec, but I'd need to think about
>>> assume_that a bit. We're dealing with Ruby here, not Java, and we
>>> don't suffer things like a 'final' keyword that force us to have to
>>> make assumptions like this. Unless we add some additional feedback,
>>> like "such and such example did not run due to faulty assumptions,"
>>> this seems quite dangerous to me. And even with that, it means that CI
>>> servers are going to pass examples that are never actually run.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>> About assumptions from the readme (http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/
>>>> ReleaseNotes4.4.html#assumptions):
>>>> "Ideally, the developer writing a test has control of all of the
>>>> forces that might cause a test to fail. If this isn't immediately
>>>> possible, making dependencies explicit can often improve a design.
>>>> For example, if a test fails when run in a different locale than the
>>>> developer intended, it can be fixed by explicitly passing a locale to
>>>> the domain code.
>>>>         
>>>> However, sometimes this is not desirable or possible.
>>>> It's good to be able to run a test against the code as it is currently
>>>> written, implicit assumptions and all, or to write a test that exposes
>>>> a known bug. For these situations, JUnit now includes the ability to
>>>> express "assumptions":
>>>> "
>>>>         
>>>> /Morten
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>>> rspec-us... at rubyforge.org
>>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>>>         
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
>
>   


From pat.maddox at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 14:59:24 2009
From: pat.maddox at gmail.com (Pat Maddox)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 11:59:24 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Any way to continue on Assertion Failure
In-Reply-To: <4A1C7C40.2020501@employees.org>
References: <4A1C7C40.2020501@employees.org>
Message-ID: <2c7e61990906011159r3b8e9fbcs846bd75b9d2d7d35@mail.gmail.com>

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
team.should have(1).players
fails.  Do I get any value from seeing the second expectation fail?
What if it passes?

My suggestion is to break up your long running test flow into bits
that you can test individually, that run quickly and independently of
each other.  Get those tested, and have an integration test which
makes sure that everything works together.

Pat

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Gary Lin <glin at employees.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder if there is any way to tell the test script to continue even when
> encountering an assertion failure? ?The reason I am asking this is because I
> have a test flow that can take a long time to run and it would be very
> useful if I can perform all verification at the end of test flow in one shot
> rather than fail one and exit immediately. ?Of course, I could break each
> verification point into separate test case, but then it will double or
> triple the overall execution time. ?Does RSpec support this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Gary
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From pat.maddox at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 15:52:02 2009
From: pat.maddox at gmail.com (Pat Maddox)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:52:02 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <4A241837.9090504@aps.org>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com>
	<852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
	<2c7e61990906010951w5b66ac2ei97401a07cafc970d@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A241837.9090504@aps.org>
Message-ID: <2c7e61990906011252p7357d9f8mbef3dc90ee90e866@mail.gmail.com>

Right, and in the code example I gave, if those preconditions fail
then the rest of the example won't be run.  There's not really any
need for a new semantic element in RSpec, it already works this way
out of the box.  You can do

it "should do something" do
  some_precondition.should be_met
  an_object.do_something
  some_postcondition.should be_met
end

If the precondition is not met, the example fails and halts right there.

If you do want to visually distinguish them for some reason, you can
do so easily:

def assumptions
  yield
end

it "should do something" do
  assumptions do
    some_precondition.should be_met
  end

  an_object.do_something
  some_postcondition.should be_met
end

I personally wouldn't :)  but you could.  I often use precondition
expectations in my examples.  It helps me know where an error is more
quickly.  I don't waste time tracking down errors that result from
some precondition (assumption) being incorrect.

Pat

On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Arthur Smith <apsmith at aps.org> wrote:
> I thought the point was we don't want the examples to be run at all, if the
> condition is not met? Though I'm wondering why not just handle something
> like this with a stub (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
>> ? @org_root_prop.trim.should_not be_empty
>> end
>>
>> If either of those expectations fail then the examples that require
>> that property will report failures. ?If I were using this all over the
>> place, I would write a custom matcher.
>>
>> before(:each) do
>> ?java.lang.System.should have_property("root")
>> ?@org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")
>> end
>>
>> This would allow you to define your own error message and perform more
>> sophisticated expectations (see the have_tag/with_tag example in
>> rspec-rails).
>>
>> Note that you should be doing this check in before(:each) because you
>> want it to run before each example. ?Also you should be using
>> before(:each) 99% of the time anyway.
>>
>> Pat
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 4:12 AM, mortench <mortench at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the suggestion! It indeed make sense for the Junit
>>> example... However, my particular usage case for assumption is a bit
>>> different. I am using jruby+jspec and I have a group of rspec examples
>>> that all require a java property to be set for the examples to be able
>>> to run. Besides, the examples also have an after action that will also
>>> break if the java propety is not set. Idealy, I would like to do
>>> something like.
>>>
>>> before(:all) do
>>> ? @org_root_prop = java.lang.System.getProperty("root")
>>>
>>> ? # abort all examples and after action if condition is not meet:
>>> ? ensure_that !rootPath.nil? && rootPath.strip.length>0
>>> end
>>>
>>> Notice, that the assume is in a before action and not in the examples
>>> themselves + it should affect the examples and after action (none of
>>> which should run if before action assumptions are not meet).
>>>
>>> /Morten
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 1, 12:58 pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 5:33 AM, mortench <morte... at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> JUnit 4.4+ has a feature called assumptions and I am looking for
>>>>> something similar in rspec so that I can express that my examples
>>>>> require a specific environment variable to be specified for testing to
>>>>> make sense.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is no explicit support for this, but you could always just say
>>>> (taking the example from the page you cited):
>>>>
>>>> def assume_that(expression)
>>>> ?yield if expression
>>>> end
>>>>
>>>> def verify_that(actual, expected)
>>>> ?actual.should expected
>>>> end
>>>>
>>>> it "should blah de blah" do
>>>> ?assume_that(File::SEPARATOR == "/") do
>>>> ? ?ensure_that User.new("optimus"), eql("configfiles/optimus.cfg")
>>>> ?end
>>>> end
>>>>
>>>> I am planning to add support for something like ensure_that (name up
>>>> for grabs) in a future version of rspec, but I'd need to think about
>>>> assume_that a bit. We're dealing with Ruby here, not Java, and we
>>>> don't suffer things like a 'final' keyword that force us to have to
>>>> make assumptions like this. Unless we add some additional feedback,
>>>> like "such and such example did not run due to faulty assumptions,"
>>>> this seems quite dangerous to me. And even with that, it means that CI
>>>> servers are going to pass examples that are never actually run.
>>>>
>>>> HTH,
>>>> David
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> About assumptions from the readme (http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/
>>>>> ReleaseNotes4.4.html#assumptions):
>>>>> "Ideally, the developer writing a test has control of all of the
>>>>> forces that might cause a test to fail. If this isn't immediately
>>>>> possible, making dependencies explicit can often improve a design.
>>>>> For example, if a test fails when run in a different locale than the
>>>>> developer intended, it can be fixed by explicitly passing a locale to
>>>>> the domain code.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?However, sometimes this is not desirable or possible.
>>>>> It's good to be able to run a test against the code as it is currently
>>>>> written, implicit assumptions and all, or to write a test that exposes
>>>>> a known bug. For these situations, JUnit now includes the ability to
>>>>> express "assumptions":
>>>>> "
>>>>> ? ? ? ?/Morten
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>>>> rspec-us... at rubyforge.org
>>>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>>>
>>>> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From mortench at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 15:57:48 2009
From: mortench at gmail.com (mortench)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 12:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <4A241837.9090504@aps.org>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com> 
	<852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com> 
	<2c7e61990906010951w5b66ac2ei97401a07cafc970d@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A241837.9090504@aps.org>
Message-ID: <970827e0-e79b-49c2-8bc2-db37c2de80cc@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>

On Jun 1, 8:04?pm, Arthur Smith <apsm... at aps.org> wrote:
> I thought the point was we don't want the examples to be run at all, if
> the condition is not met?

Yes.

>Though I'm wondering why not just handle
> something like this with a stub (on System.getProperty in this case)?

Because the examples need the info in the property to work. The
property provides
reference values that the test use to compare against. Hence it makes
no sense to stub
anything out.

ALL: Thanks for all the help!

/Morten

From matt at mattwynne.net  Mon Jun  1 16:56:07 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 21:56:07 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Does rspec support something like Assumptions in
	JUnit 4.4?
In-Reply-To: <2c7e61990906011252p7357d9f8mbef3dc90ee90e866@mail.gmail.com>
References: <93dcccd4-bc27-427e-bbc0-c1f3ef313317@c19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906010358y17cee7d1w452e80b29030e3a2@mail.gmail.com>
	<852a2dfd-98eb-4b73-af9c-fb482fc69a7f@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>
	<2c7e61990906010951w5b66ac2ei97401a07cafc970d@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A241837.9090504@aps.org>
	<2c7e61990906011252p7357d9f8mbef3dc90ee90e866@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6D52AC7F-0AD0-48A6-A274-01715364BC7C@mattwynne.net>


On 1 Jun 2009, at 20:52, Pat Maddox wrote:

> You can do
>
> it "should do something" do
>  some_precondition.should be_met
>  an_object.do_something
>  some_postcondition.should be_met
> end

Also, more verbosely...

describe "when there is some precondition"
   before(:each) do
     do_stuff_which_attempts_to_set_up_some_precondition
     some_precondition.should be_met
   end

   it "should do something"
     an_object.do_something
     some_postcondition.should be_met
   end
end

Which, can often make your specs read nicely. I also offers an obvious  
space to think of a few more examples to throw in there.

cheers,
Matt

From Jarmo.P at gmail.com  Mon Jun  1 17:10:55 2009
From: Jarmo.P at gmail.com (Jarmo Pertman)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 14:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] autospec runs failing specs forever in endless
	loop
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0905311456m28f97a25tb3f915aa21a57f9e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <323c176b-321f-4197-ba30-2f6c02112ed1@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0905311456m28f97a25tb3f915aa21a57f9e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4e0f2a76-f515-492d-9992-341b2221f54a@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>

No, I didn't have that one, but had one similar problem where one of
my specs edited one non-Ruby file, which caused autotest to reload. I
solved that problem by explicitly ignoring it in autotest. I was
surprised that autotest cares about non-mapped files :)

But now I have another problem - it seems that autotest doesn't
understand always when something really failed and it seems to be due
to the fact that autotest.rb has this line:
self.failed_results_re = /^\s+\d+\) (?:Failure|Error):\n(.*?)\((.*?)
\)/

It doesn't match correctly with most of the failing specs so Snarl
(like Growl for Windows) shows that tests are passing when they're
actually not. So, I digged around a little more to see if RSpec
modifies this regular expression somewhere and I found it at lib/
autotest/rspec.rb and there is this class Autotest::Rspec < Autotest,
which overwrites failed_results_re as: self.failed_results_re = /^\d+\)
\n(?:\e\[\d*m)?(?:.*?in )?'([^\n]*)'(?: FAILED)?(?:\e\[\d*m)?\n(.*?)\n
\n/m

This autotest thing seems to be quite strange, because if I added some
puts statements into discover.rb and rspec.rb then they didn't seem to
get executed, BUT if I putsed this failed_results_re in autotest.rb
itself, then it was set correctly as written above.

My .autotest file is as following:
require 'autotest/menu'
require 'autotest/snarl'

Autotest.add_hook :initialize do |at|
	at.add_exception(/\.sqlite/)
    at.add_exception(/^\.git/)
end

And spec.opts is like this:
-r spec/env.rb
-c

And I'm running autospec and seeing this output:
1)
'correct year' FAILED

expected "2008"
     got "2009"

(compared using eql?)

./spec/year_spec.rb:38:

Finished in 5.918 seconds

11 examples, 1 failure

And when I added to autotest.rb line 410 this: p self.files_to_test
Then the resulted hash was empty, e.g. this line sets result to
"green": color = completed &&
self.files_to_test.empty? ? :green : :red

When I break some other test with different error message like this,
then Snarl shows me failing tests:
1)
NoMethodError in 'DatabaseOperations adds options'
undefined method `[]' for nil:NilClass
./spec/database_operations_spec.rb:50:

The difference is that failing reason is shown on one line, instead of
two lines. Also, p elf.files_to_test results in "normal" result:
{"spec/database_operations_spec.rb"=>["DatabaseOperations adds
options", "DatabaseOperations adds new default_options if some are
missing"]}

- Is it possible that this regular expression is little outdated and
can't handle the situation where failing reason is shown on 2 lines?
- Why won't anything puts'ed from autotest/discover.rb or autotest/
rspec.rb like they aren't loaded?
- Any other reasons why autotest behaviour might be broken?

Jarmo

On Jun 1, 12:56?am, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Jarmo Pertman <Jarm... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I wanted to start using autospec on my little (non-Rails) project. I'm
> > on Windows XP and have used it some time ago successfully (on the same
> > PC), although I've updated many gems in the meantime (RSpec for
> > example among others).
>
> > In short, everything is fine when all specs pass, but if some fails,
> > then autospec won't stop running failing specs again even if no files
> > are changed. I expect it to run specs again only if some file gets
> > modified. It's kinda irritating when it doesn't stop and is by no
> > means helping any development :/
>
> > Also, when I fix the failing spec then it will run it only once and
> > then run whole suit once and stops as expected.
>
> > Any ideas what might cause this distracting behaviour?
>
> Do you have "--format failing_examples" in spec/spec.opts? If so,
> rspec saves a file with a list of the failing examples in it, which
> would trigger autotest to run again unless that file is explicitly
> ignored.
>
> HTH,
> David
>
>
>
> > BR,
> > Jarmo
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From timcharper at gmail.com  Tue Jun  2 01:58:50 2009
From: timcharper at gmail.com (Tim Harper)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 23:58:50 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] spec_server errors when reloading fixture
	replacement pl
In-Reply-To: <5e62f6f34e444a8e7267736994822cd8@ruby-forum.com>
References: <1106da77-505a-4262-b9df-a67c9af6027b@w35g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0905010704r254bab7bn5ac3d32b8027672f@mail.gmail.com> 
	<CA41629A-D345-43AA-8EB2-FD54955F5892@avit.ca>
	<fafd7a4a2d9ab51f0b3d480b0616f376@ruby-forum.com> 
	<4A173837.7090605@railsnewbie.com> <4A18D839.6030709@benmabey.com> 
	<4A1913CE.4070409@railsnewbie.com> <4A1A29D3.9020102@benmabey.com> 
	<3c30da400905261022t1839a207m5824fad50b73a846@mail.gmail.com> 
	<5e62f6f34e444a8e7267736994822cd8@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <e1a5e9a00906012258r753cfabaje48b3e78fe71ff44@mail.gmail.com>

Ben J.,
Have you given up on this?  You're right - that defeats the purpose of
Spork. You need to make sure that any code that loads code in your project
does not make it in to your Spork.prefork block.  If you are specifically
loading the models in your environment, that's your problem.

Here's some possible options to resolve what you're experiencing:

1) Add spork blocks to your environment.rb to put portions that are loading
code you develop on inside of a Spork.each_run block, and the rest of it in
a Spork.prefork block.

2) modify your environment.rb file to only load libraries like gems and
plug-ins, and set up autoload to load the rest of your classes as you need
them. Alternatively, is this is a matter of pre-caching, you could choose
not to load those classes preemptively in the test environment.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090601/6b19cac7/attachment.html>

From evgeny.bogdanov at gmail.com  Tue Jun  2 03:50:25 2009
From: evgeny.bogdanov at gmail.com (Evgeny Bogdanov)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 00:50:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] [rspec] How to pass route parameters to post method?
Message-ID: <93124666-d42b-4381-8905-39915eceaae9@j32g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>

Hello,

I am trying to spec an action in a controller, and rspec doesn't find
a route.
It seems that problem is in ":viewtype". If I change a line
"/:viewtype/asset/add"
into "/context/asset/add" in routes it works.

I tried also
post "/context/asset/add", no luck.

Could you please let me know how I can call the action through
that route with post method?

Thank you in advance,
Evgeny
=====================
  map.with_options(:controller => "assets", :conditions =>{:method
=> :post}) do |m|
    m.create_asset                   '/:viewtype/asset/
add',                        :action => 'create'
  end

describe AssetsController, "when working with formats" do
  it "should call a find_asset_format for some actions" do
    post :create
  end
end


From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun  2 11:53:33 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Wolfram Arnold)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 17:53:33 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Cucumber vs Rails Fixtures
In-Reply-To: <4A1445E1.3070204@benmabey.com>
References: <gv1fhe$eg6$1@ger.gmane.org> <4A1445E1.3070204@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <d10a0a5e851d2309adfbda4da696d28b@ruby-forum.com>

>> How do I actually use real, pre-existing Rails fixtures, the same as 
>> the unit tests use? For familiarity?

What I was missing is the regular use of fixtures as in rspec or test 
unit, like so:

u = users(:bob)
u.email = "aaa"
u.should_not be_valid

This link
> 
> http://wiki.github.com/aslakhellesoy/cucumber/fixtures
> 
described how to get fixtures loaded for the entire suite, so that you 
can say:

u = User.find(1)

or

u = User.find_by_name("Bob")

this is kind of a drag, if you have a well formed fixture file with 
symbolic names, etc.

So I came up with this (which was developed and tested in Cucumber gem 
version 0.2.3, and I haven't tried it yet with the latest 0.3.9):

Add this to your env file:

Fixtures.reset_cache
fixtures_folder = File.join(RAILS_ROOT, 'test', 'fixtures')
fixtures = Dir[File.join(fixtures_folder, '*.yml')].map {|f| 
File.basename(f, '.yml') }
fixtures << Dir[File.join(fixtures_folder, '*.csv')].map {|f| 
File.basename(f, '.csv') }

# If your fixture files are named differently from the classes they 
refer to,
# you also need to do this:
#
#   class_table_mappings = {:table_name_in_db => class_name}
#   Fixtures.create_fixtures(fixtures_folder, fixtures, 
class_table_mappings)
#
# otherwise:

# This will populate the test database tables
Fixtures.create_fixtures(fixtures_folder, fixtures)

# The following will define methods that can access symbolic fixture 
names,
# as in users(:bob)

World do |world|

  (class << world; self; end).class_eval do
    @@fixture_cache = {}
    fixtures.each do |table_name|
      table_name = table_name.to_s.tr('.', '_')
      define_method(table_name) do |*fixture_symbols|
        @@fixture_cache[table_name] ||= {}

        instances = fixture_symbols.map do |fixture_symbol|
          if fix = 
Fixtures.cached_fixtures(ActiveRecord::Base.connection, 
table_name)[fixture_symbol.to_s]
            @@fixture_cache[table_name][fixture_symbol] ||= fix.find  # 
find model.find's the instance
          else
            raise StandardError, "No fixture with name 
'#{fixture_symbol}' found for table '#{table_name}'"
          end
        end
        instances.size == 1 ? instances.first : instances
      end
    end
  end
  world
end


-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun  2 12:03:15 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Wolfram Arnold)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 18:03:15 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Cucumber vs Rails Fixtures
In-Reply-To: <d10a0a5e851d2309adfbda4da696d28b@ruby-forum.com>
References: <gv1fhe$eg6$1@ger.gmane.org> <4A1445E1.3070204@benmabey.com>
	<d10a0a5e851d2309adfbda4da696d28b@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <001e00da53125003ed65f21a2fedc492@ruby-forum.com>

I've updated http://wiki.github.com/aslakhellesoy/cucumber/fixtures 
accordingly.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From Jarmo.P at gmail.com  Tue Jun  2 12:07:33 2009
From: Jarmo.P at gmail.com (Jarmo Pertman)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 09:07:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] autospec runs failing specs forever in endless
	loop
In-Reply-To: <4e0f2a76-f515-492d-9992-341b2221f54a@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>
References: <323c176b-321f-4197-ba30-2f6c02112ed1@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0905311456m28f97a25tb3f915aa21a57f9e@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4e0f2a76-f515-492d-9992-341b2221f54a@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <1169fe9c-dd76-4dd5-8d93-e9c42c052f3d@j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com>

Ok. I've created failing example.

Just create project directory and spec directory into it and add there
one spec file:

describe "autospec" do

	it "fails" do
		"hi".should eql("hello")
	end

end

It fails, but for autotest it is still green (thus making growl and
snarl to report as everything is passing) and now I'm pretty sure that
it has to do with the fact that "should eql" outputs "expected" and
"got" result on different lines. As soon as you replace the matcher
to: "hi".eql?("hello").should be_true - then output is on single line
and autotest detects it as failing.

Still, problem is with the regular expression provided for autotest?

Jarmo


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun  2 12:50:03 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 11:50:03 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] autospec runs failing specs forever in endless
	loop
In-Reply-To: <1169fe9c-dd76-4dd5-8d93-e9c42c052f3d@j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
References: <323c176b-321f-4197-ba30-2f6c02112ed1@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0905311456m28f97a25tb3f915aa21a57f9e@mail.gmail.com>
	<4e0f2a76-f515-492d-9992-341b2221f54a@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>
	<1169fe9c-dd76-4dd5-8d93-e9c42c052f3d@j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906020950q65932ac4k937768b7b78b72d8@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Jarmo Pertman <Jarmo.P at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok. I've created failing example.
>
> Just create project directory and spec directory into it and add there
> one spec file:
>
> describe "autospec" do
>
> ? ? ? ?it "fails" do
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?"hi".should eql("hello")
> ? ? ? ?end
>
> end
>
> It fails, but for autotest it is still green (thus making growl and
> snarl to report as everything is passing) and now I'm pretty sure that
> it has to do with the fact that "should eql" outputs "expected" and
> "got" result on different lines. As soon as you replace the matcher
> to: "hi".eql?("hello").should be_true - then output is on single line
> and autotest detects it as failing.
>
> Still, problem is with the regular expression provided for autotest?

Seems likely. Wanna make a proper patch w/ specs?

>
> Jarmo
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From Jarmo.P at gmail.com  Tue Jun  2 13:31:48 2009
From: Jarmo.P at gmail.com (Jarmo Pertman)
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:31:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] autospec runs failing specs forever in endless
	loop
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906020950q65932ac4k937768b7b78b72d8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <323c176b-321f-4197-ba30-2f6c02112ed1@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0905311456m28f97a25tb3f915aa21a57f9e@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4e0f2a76-f515-492d-9992-341b2221f54a@r34g2000vbi.googlegroups.com> 
	<1169fe9c-dd76-4dd5-8d93-e9c42c052f3d@j18g2000yql.googlegroups.com> 
	<57c63afe0906020950q65932ac4k937768b7b78b72d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c7ae78a6-32a5-41d5-901a-74fc5fd39ef7@l12g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>

Done at
https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645-rspec/tickets/832-autotest-not-detecting-failing-examples-correctly-when-matcher-outputs-multiple-lines-of-information

I started even before you've replied, because that bugged me too
much :)

Jarmo

On Jun 2, 7:50?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> Seems likely. Wanna make a proper patch w/ specs?

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Jun  3 10:38:38 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 09:38:38 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] infoworld article on BDD
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906030738j7cafdbadlff1c816ad78e33b9@mail.gmail.com>

infoworld article on BDD

http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/behavior-driven-development-catches-605

Good article other than "Behavior" (sans u) and "BDD insists on inside-out."

From rick.denatale at gmail.com  Wed Jun  3 11:14:00 2009
From: rick.denatale at gmail.com (Rick DeNatale)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:14:00 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] New Zentest, any feedback?
Message-ID: <deb2337a0906030814u23e4b3c1raea2290a3033c5e0@mail.gmail.com>

So I notice that Ryan released a new zentest gem today. It looks like
it has been refactored a bit.

Are there any brave guinea pigs/canaries in the RSpec/Cucumber
community who have tried it out? Any issues?  I do see that someone
has been reporting some problems with multiruby which is a part of
zentest which a lot of folks don't use as much.

-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From joe at pinkpucker.net  Wed Jun  3 13:01:52 2009
From: joe at pinkpucker.net (Joe Van Dyk)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 10:01:52 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] having autospec run tests?
Message-ID: <c715e640906031001y2a91c7c5i1b574cdbd5aa4391@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On one project, I have cucumber features and test/unit (well, i guess
activesupport::testcase) tests.

I really like how:
AUTOFEATURE=true autospec
works on my projects that use rspec and cucumber.

Can I get that same behavior, but with my tests in the tests directory?

Joe

From sfeley at gmail.com  Wed Jun  3 13:28:28 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:28:28 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] having autospec run tests?
In-Reply-To: <c715e640906031001y2a91c7c5i1b574cdbd5aa4391@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c715e640906031001y2a91c7c5i1b574cdbd5aa4391@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906031028s3a582ee4jaf1a618d9a54a12c@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Joe Van Dyk <joe at pinkpucker.net> wrote:
>
> I really like how:
> AUTOFEATURE=true autospec
> works on my projects that use rspec and cucumber.
>
> Can I get that same behavior, but with my tests in the tests directory?

Sure.  In fact it should work just fine out of the box: do the same
thing, but with 'autotest' instead of 'autospec'.  (The check for that
environment variable isn't in the autospec script, it's in the
discovery file that Cucumber sets up.)


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Wed Jun  3 13:46:13 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Sebastian W.)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 19:46:13 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock should receive no messages?
Message-ID: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>

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.

Thank you!
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Jun  3 14:01:39 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:01:39 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock should receive no messages?
In-Reply-To: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
References: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906031101tcd56c45xd36a2974026785de@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Sebastian W. <lists at 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.

You can tell it to expect not to receive a specific message, but there
is no way to say that it should not receive any messages.

Cheers,
David

>
> Thank you!

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Wed Jun  3 14:19:37 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Sebastian W.)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 20:19:37 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock should receive no messages?
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906031101tcd56c45xd36a2974026785de@mail.gmail.com>
References: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906031101tcd56c45xd36a2974026785de@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <86f8ef0bee3e4b32d30fcacf42af4b48@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Sebastian W. <lists at 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.
> 
> You can tell it to expect not to receive a specific message, but there
> is no way to say that it should not receive any messages.
> 
> Cheers,
> David

Okay, cool - feature request? : )

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From rick.denatale at gmail.com  Wed Jun  3 14:26:18 2009
From: rick.denatale at gmail.com (Rick DeNatale)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 14:26:18 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock should receive no messages?
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906031101tcd56c45xd36a2974026785de@mail.gmail.com>
References: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906031101tcd56c45xd36a2974026785de@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deb2337a0906031126h281374b5o32eb5c2339894ea3@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:01 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Sebastian W. <lists at 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.
>
> You can tell it to expect not to receive a specific message, but there
> is no way to say that it should not receive any messages.

Maybe not explicitly but doesn't isn't making a mock with no
expectations effectively the same thing:

describe "an object which should not get any messages" do
  it "should not receive any messages" do
    o = mock("Object")
    o.foo
  end
end

Mock 'Object' received unexpected message :foo with (no args)


-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Jun  3 14:30:48 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:30:48 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock should receive no messages?
In-Reply-To: <deb2337a0906031126h281374b5o32eb5c2339894ea3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906031101tcd56c45xd36a2974026785de@mail.gmail.com>
	<deb2337a0906031126h281374b5o32eb5c2339894ea3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906031130q75e6ed17h2ec646f7b6c96626@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:01 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Sebastian W. <lists at 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.
>>
>> You can tell it to expect not to receive a specific message, but there
>> is no way to say that it should not receive any messages.
>
> Maybe not explicitly but doesn't isn't making a mock with no
> expectations effectively the same thing:
>
> describe "an object which should not get any messages" do
> ?it "should not receive any messages" do
> ? ?o = mock("Object")
> ? ?o.foo
> ?end
> end
>
> Mock 'Object' received unexpected message :foo with (no args)

Right - Sebastian noted that in the original post - but he's looking
for something explicit.

> --
> Rick DeNatale
>
> Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
> WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From joe at fixieconsulting.com  Wed Jun  3 14:30:56 2009
From: joe at fixieconsulting.com (Joe Van Dyk)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:30:56 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] having autospec run tests?
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906031028s3a582ee4jaf1a618d9a54a12c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c715e640906031001y2a91c7c5i1b574cdbd5aa4391@mail.gmail.com> 
	<1fb4df0906031028s3a582ee4jaf1a618d9a54a12c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c715e640906031130k511fc97lea48f961e64383ac@mail.gmail.com>

autotest doesn't seem to work for me, for some reason:

that file doesn't get loaded when autospec runs.

/home/joe/projects/zoolah/vendor/plugins/mocha/lib/mocha/integration/test_unit.rb:17:in
`remove_method': method `run' not defined in Test::Unit::TestCase
(NameError)
	from /home/joe/projects/zoolah/vendor/plugins/mocha/lib/mocha/integration/test_unit.rb:17
	from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:31:in
`gem_original_require'
	from /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:31:in
`polyglot_original_require'
	from /home/joe/projects/zoolah/vendor/gems/polyglot-0.2.5/lib/polyglot.rb:54:in
`require'
	from /home/joe/projects/zoolah/vendor/rails/activesupport/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:158:in
`require'
	from /home/joe/projects/zoolah/vendor/rails/activesupport/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:265:in
`require_or_load'
	from /home/joe/projects/zoolah/vendor/rails/activesupport/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:425:in
`load_missing_constant'
	from /home/joe/projects/zoolah/vendor/rails/activesupport/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:80:in
`const_missing'
	 ... 11 levels...
	from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/test/unit/autorunner.rb:216:in `run'
	from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/test/unit/autorunner.rb:12:in `run'
	from /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/test/unit.rb:278
	from -e:1


On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:28 AM, Stephen Eley <sfeley at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Joe Van Dyk <joe at pinkpucker.net> wrote:
>>
>> I really like how:
>> AUTOFEATURE=true autospec
>> works on my projects that use rspec and cucumber.
>>
>> Can I get that same behavior, but with my tests in the tests directory?
>
> Sure. ?In fact it should work just fine out of the box: do the same
> thing, but with 'autotest' instead of 'autospec'. ?(The check for that
> environment variable isn't in the autospec script, it's in the
> discovery file that Cucumber sets up.)
>
>
> --
> Have Fun,
> ? Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
> ? ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
> ? http://www.escapepod.org
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From rick.denatale at gmail.com  Wed Jun  3 14:36:40 2009
From: rick.denatale at gmail.com (Rick DeNatale)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 14:36:40 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock should receive no messages?
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906031130q75e6ed17h2ec646f7b6c96626@mail.gmail.com>
References: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906031101tcd56c45xd36a2974026785de@mail.gmail.com>
	<deb2337a0906031126h281374b5o32eb5c2339894ea3@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906031130q75e6ed17h2ec646f7b6c96626@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deb2337a0906031136q7eeb95b4i94abc63bb5d88164@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:30 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:26 PM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:01 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Sebastian W. <lists at 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.
>>>
>>> You can tell it to expect not to receive a specific message, but there
>>> is no way to say that it should not receive any messages.
>>
>> Maybe not explicitly but doesn't isn't making a mock with no
>> expectations effectively the same thing:
>>
>> describe "an object which should not get any messages" do
>> ?it "should not receive any messages" do
>> ? ?o = mock("Object")
>> ? ?o.foo
>> ?end
>> end
>>
>> Mock 'Object' received unexpected message :foo with (no args)
>
> Right - Sebastian noted that in the original post - but he's looking
> for something explicit.

Well how about:

describe "an object which should not get any messages" do
  it "should not receive any messages" do
    o = mock("Object")
    o.should_not_receive(:a_damned_thing)
    o.foo
  end
end

<G>


-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Jun  3 14:37:10 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 13:37:10 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock should receive no messages?
In-Reply-To: <86f8ef0bee3e4b32d30fcacf42af4b48@ruby-forum.com>
References: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906031101tcd56c45xd36a2974026785de@mail.gmail.com>
	<86f8ef0bee3e4b32d30fcacf42af4b48@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906031137m1d107fb4y78ea7d709adf57a2@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Sebastian W. <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Sebastian W. <lists at 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.
>>
>> You can tell it to expect not to receive a specific message, but there
>> is no way to say that it should not receive any messages.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David
>
> Okay, cool - feature request? : )

You never have to ask to make a feature request - just make one:

http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com

> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From kero at chello.nl  Wed Jun  3 17:29:14 2009
From: kero at chello.nl (Kero van Gelder)
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 23:29:14 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] New Zentest, any feedback?
In-Reply-To: <deb2337a0906030814u23e4b3c1raea2290a3033c5e0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <deb2337a0906030814u23e4b3c1raea2290a3033c5e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20090603212914.GA30527@bumblebee.m38c.nl>

> So I notice that Ryan released a new zentest gem today. It looks like
> it has been refactored a bit.
> 
> Are there any brave guinea pigs/canaries in the RSpec/Cucumber
> community who have tried it out? Any issues?  I do see that someone
> has been reporting some problems with multiruby which is a part of
> zentest which a lot of folks don't use as much.

A quick test shows that it still reruns cucumber when I change a feature
and runs rspec when I change a ruby file.
and that it does not rerun anything when I touch a file for which there
is an exception
(e.g. when I do something with git, add_exception %r{\.git} triggers
nothing anymore, whereas the previous gem triggered a run of cucumber,
which was remendously annoying).

I'm not using rails and also not using any other sort of additional
framework. no webrat, etc.

Bye,
Kero.
___
How can I change the world if I can't even change myself?
  -- Faithless, Salva Mea

From jona.hunt777 at gmail.com  Thu Jun  4 01:53:25 2009
From: jona.hunt777 at gmail.com (Hunt Jon)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 14:53:25 +0900
Subject: [rspec-users] Difference between spec:server and autospec
Message-ID: <5e1f1f1f0906032253n5b528eb1ga0f69d4c1a31a0ea@mail.gmail.com>

What's the difference between spec:server and autospec?

I understand spec:server is only for a Rails project while autospec
can work with any projects.

I read http://wiki.github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/spec_server-autospec-nearly-pure-bdd-joy
but couldn't understand it.

I leave autotest/autospec running during the development.
"autotest-fsevent" is very
helpful for me, a Mac user.

Do we use both at the same time for Rails projects?

Jon

From scott at railsnewbie.com  Thu Jun  4 02:24:53 2009
From: scott at railsnewbie.com (Scott Taylor)
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 02:24:53 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Difference between spec:server and autospec
In-Reply-To: <5e1f1f1f0906032253n5b528eb1ga0f69d4c1a31a0ea@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5e1f1f1f0906032253n5b528eb1ga0f69d4c1a31a0ea@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A2768B5.6020201@railsnewbie.com>

Hunt Jon wrote:
> What's the difference between spec:server and autospec?
>
>   
I wouldn't recommend using spec server - use spork instead:

http://github.com/timcharper/spork/tree/master

Both load the rails environment, so that each time you run your tests 
(with script/spec -X or script/spec --drb) you won't have to wait for it 
to load up (which can take 4-5 seconds).

autospec/autotest, on the other hand, polls the filesystem every 3 
seconds or so for changes.  When it sees one, it reruns just the test or 
spec file which has changed.

Scott


From jona.hunt777 at gmail.com  Thu Jun  4 03:44:45 2009
From: jona.hunt777 at gmail.com (Hunt Jon)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:44:45 +0900
Subject: [rspec-users] Difference between spec:server and autospec
In-Reply-To: <4A2768B5.6020201@railsnewbie.com>
References: <5e1f1f1f0906032253n5b528eb1ga0f69d4c1a31a0ea@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A2768B5.6020201@railsnewbie.com>
Message-ID: <5e1f1f1f0906040044ja120fddkf830757666031955@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Scott.

I don't get what happens if I add --drb
to spec/spec.opts
files.

Can anybody explain to me, please?

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Scott Taylor <scott at railsnewbie.com> wrote:
> Hunt Jon wrote:
>>
>> What's the difference between spec:server and autospec?
>>
>>
>
> I wouldn't recommend using spec server - use spork instead:
>
> http://github.com/timcharper/spork/tree/master
>
> Both load the rails environment, so that each time you run your tests (with
> script/spec -X or script/spec --drb) you won't have to wait for it to load
> up (which can take 4-5 seconds).
>
> autospec/autotest, on the other hand, polls the filesystem every 3 seconds
> or so for changes. ?When it sees one, it reruns just the test or spec file
> which has changed.
>
> Scott
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From scott at railsnewbie.com  Thu Jun  4 04:14:57 2009
From: scott at railsnewbie.com (Scott Taylor)
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 04:14:57 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Difference between spec:server and autospec
In-Reply-To: <5e1f1f1f0906040044ja120fddkf830757666031955@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5e1f1f1f0906032253n5b528eb1ga0f69d4c1a31a0ea@mail.gmail.com>	<4A2768B5.6020201@railsnewbie.com>
	<5e1f1f1f0906040044ja120fddkf830757666031955@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A278281.6000207@railsnewbie.com>

Hunt Jon wrote:
> Thanks Scott.
>
> I don't get what happens if I add --drb
> to spec/spec.opts
> files.
>   

If you add --drb to your spec.opts (or you run script/spec --drb 
spec/my_spec.rb) - you will run your specs through the spec server. 

Without --drb, rails will load up in a fresh process.

The *whole point* of the drb server is to speed up load time when 
running specs.

Just to give you an idea, here's the difference for me (with spork 
instead of the spec server):

http://screencast.com/t/qhRvqiXc

Scott
> Can anybody explain to me, please?
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Scott Taylor <scott at railsnewbie.com> wrote:
>   
>> Hunt Jon wrote:
>>     
>>> What's the difference between spec:server and autospec?
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> I wouldn't recommend using spec server - use spork instead:
>>
>> http://github.com/timcharper/spork/tree/master
>>
>> Both load the rails environment, so that each time you run your tests (with
>> script/spec -X or script/spec --drb) you won't have to wait for it to load
>> up (which can take 4-5 seconds).
>>
>> autospec/autotest, on the other hand, polls the filesystem every 3 seconds
>> or so for changes.  When it sees one, it reruns just the test or spec file
>> which has changed.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>   


From pat.maddox at gmail.com  Thu Jun  4 20:53:38 2009
From: pat.maddox at gmail.com (Pat Maddox)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 17:53:38 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock should receive no messages?
In-Reply-To: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
References: <94197c1d081e58d8af50fc2f70fbcdbf@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <2c7e61990906041753g553e6304gb3021e8922e0ef48@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Sebastian W. <lists at 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 mock object's name.

my_mock = mock('never receives a message')

I don't see any reason why something should be added to RSpec core.

Pat

From amkirwan at gmail.com  Thu Jun  4 21:19:35 2009
From: amkirwan at gmail.com (amkirwan)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 18:19:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-rails  img src and timestamps
Message-ID: <3be7e2cb-b323-44ca-9cce-e4f76d939f98@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>

when I run the following matcher bellow it fails because rails adds
the timestamp after the file name. I've looked around but have not
found anyone else having this problem. I am new to rails and rspec so
maybe I am completely missing something obvious.

 response.should have_selector("#logo", :src => "/images/logo.jpg")

From amkirwan at gmail.com  Thu Jun  4 21:54:55 2009
From: amkirwan at gmail.com (amkirwan)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 18:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-rails img src and timestamps
In-Reply-To: <3be7e2cb-b323-44ca-9cce-e4f76d939f98@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>
References: <3be7e2cb-b323-44ca-9cce-e4f76d939f98@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <daef498c-af0d-4c3f-bb38-463be316cafe@d31g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>

I found the answer to my own question. Just needed to use image_path
("logo.jpg"). Incase anyone else has this is I hope this helps.

response.should have_selector("#logo", :src => image_path("logo.jpg"))

On Jun 4, 9:19?pm, amkirwan <amkir... at gmail.com> wrote:
> when I run the following matcher bellow it fails because rails adds
> the timestamp after the file name. I've looked around but have not
> found anyone else having this problem. I am new to rails and rspec so
> maybe I am completely missing something obvious.
>
> ?response.should have_selector("#logo", :src => "/images/logo.jpg")
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From amkirwan at gmail.com  Thu Jun  4 18:40:38 2009
From: amkirwan at gmail.com (amkirwan)
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 15:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-rails  img src and timestamps
Message-ID: <a91bd0e3-026c-4354-8852-413d748ad7e6@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>

There is probably an easy solution to this but I am new to rails and
rspec and after searching I cannot seem to find an answer. When  I try
the following code:

 response.should have_selector("#logo", :src => "/images/logo.jpg")

it fails because rails appends a ? and timestamp to the end of the
image name.  If I put the full name it passes.


 response.should have_selector("#logo", :src => "/images/logo.jpg?
1243997048")

From matt at mattwynne.net  Fri Jun  5 02:54:10 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 07:54:10 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-rails img src and timestamps
In-Reply-To: <daef498c-af0d-4c3f-bb38-463be316cafe@d31g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
References: <3be7e2cb-b323-44ca-9cce-e4f76d939f98@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>
	<daef498c-af0d-4c3f-bb38-463be316cafe@d31g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <97295A30-F16B-4536-80A2-DCCCE78D100B@mattwynne.net>


On 5 Jun 2009, at 02:54, amkirwan wrote:

> I found the answer to my own question. Just needed to use image_path
> ("logo.jpg"). Incase anyone else has this is I hope this helps.
>
> response.should have_selector("#logo", :src => image_path("logo.jpg"))

I'd have thought there's a marginal risk (if your page renders slowly  
in the test, for example) that the timestamp might change between  
rendering the page and running this assertion. Another other way is to  
use a looser CSS selector, something like

response.should have_selector("#logo[src*=logo.jpg]")

I can't quite remember the syntax, but the idea is to search for a tag  
whose src attributes *begins with* 'logo.jpg', thereby ignoring the  
timestamp entirely.


> On Jun 4, 9:19 pm, amkirwan <amkir... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> when I run the following matcher bellow it fails because rails adds
>> the timestamp after the file name. I've looked around but have not
>> found anyone else having this problem. I am new to rails and rspec so
>> maybe I am completely missing something obvious.
>>
>>  response.should have_selector("#logo", :src => "/images/logo.jpg")
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

Matt Wynne
http://beta.songkick.com
http://blog.mattwynne.net




From evgeny.bogdanov at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 08:55:55 2009
From: evgeny.bogdanov at gmail.com (Evgeny Bogdanov)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 05:55:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] [rspec] How to pass route parameters to post
	method?
In-Reply-To: <339800360906041314k6b3d0ad2v328fe5288f072604@mail.gmail.com>
References: <93124666-d42b-4381-8905-39915eceaae9@j32g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>
	<339800360906041314k6b3d0ad2v328fe5288f072604@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <025fba16-3e3f-4c9d-88f6-b7a8ec20c8ee@h18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>

Hello Mike,

Thank you for your hint. Obviously, it worked!
Laughing at myself now: how post method was supposed to know what I
mean by :viewtype if don't specify it :)

Best,
Evgeny

On Jun 4, 10:14?pm, Mike Sassak <msas... at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Evgeny,
>
> You didn't include the error message in your email, so this is just a guess,
> but from your example, it looks like you need to specify :viewtype in your
> call to post, like so:
>
> post :create, :viewtype => 'context'
>
> The HTTP verb methods require you to specify the route parameters in order
> to work.
>
> Mike
>
> On Jun 2, 2009 3:53 AM, "Evgeny Bogdanov" <evgeny.bogda... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to spec an action in a controller, and rspec doesn't find
> a route.
> It seems that problem is in ":viewtype". If I change a line
> "/:viewtype/asset/add"
> into "/context/asset/add" in routes it works.
>
> I tried also
> post "/context/asset/add", no luck.
>
> Could you please let me know how I can call the action through
> that route with post method?
>
> Thank you in advance,
> Evgeny
> =====================
> ?map.with_options(:controller => "assets", :conditions =>{:method
> => :post}) do |m|
> ? ?m.create_asset ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? '/:viewtype/asset/
> add', ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?:action => 'create'
> ?end
>
> describe AssetsController, "when working with formats" do
> ?it "should call a find_asset_format for some actions" do
> ? ?post :create
> ?end
> end
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From matt at mattwynne.net  Fri Jun  5 09:11:11 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 14:11:11 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] response.should be_success -- what does this
	prove?
In-Reply-To: <50873a360906050536m5eda4d88q6e7259f3f4ba5098@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50873a360906050536m5eda4d88q6e7259f3f4ba5098@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9E2ED486-1F59-4C9D-A13A-971D9C7D08C5@mattwynne.net>

On 5 Jun 2009, at 13:36, doug livesey wrote:

> Hi -- if my controller action already ensures that the correct  
> template is being rendered, what use is speccing that it should also  
> be successful?
> I do it, but just because I saw someone else do it ages ago.
> Is there a point?

It checks that the response code indicates to the browser that the  
request was 200 OK (as opposed to, say a 302 redirect, or a 404 not  
found).

It's useful when you're doing TDD as it's the simplest thing to expect  
a controller to do. If you break something it's also quite a nice  
first-failure to have.

see http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html

Matt Wynne
http://blog.mattwynne.net
http://www.songkick.com


From agilejoe at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 10:44:38 2009
From: agilejoe at gmail.com (Joe Ocampo)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 09:44:38 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Example group parallel execution
Message-ID: <93cf9750906050744s686a7c55g29e98fdebd2e109e@mail.gmail.com>

So I am working on a project right now where we are combining Selenium and
RSpec.  It was working really well until we implemented the grid and started
to do parallel execution on the specs to help speed things up. We are
rolling are own framework as DeepTest did not really provide the facilities
we were hoping.

Our problem is that we have mutiple context per file.  Currently the Thread
runner executes the files in paralle per file. As you can imagine this isn't
very efficient once the grid executes it, as it simply turns a prallel
prococess back into a serial one once it parses the file.  My question is
where should I hook into RSpec to incercept the call of when the example
group "context" is being executed as an atomic unit?

Thanks for your help in advance.

Joe Ocampo
agilejoe.lostechies.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090605/164ef075/attachment.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 11:07:01 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 10:07:01 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Example group parallel execution
In-Reply-To: <93cf9750906050744s686a7c55g29e98fdebd2e109e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <93cf9750906050744s686a7c55g29e98fdebd2e109e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906050807g712fdecep65e7d3b7280c5cc7@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Joe Ocampo <agilejoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> So I am working on a project right now where we are combining Selenium and
> RSpec.? It was working really well until we implemented the grid and started
> to do parallel execution on the specs to help speed things up. We are
> rolling are own framework as DeepTest did not really provide the facilities
> we were hoping.
>
> Our problem is that we have mutiple context per file.? Currently the Thread
> runner executes the files in paralle per file. As you can imagine this isn't
> very efficient once the grid executes it, as it simply turns a prallel
> prococess back into a serial one once it parses the file.? My question is
> where should I hook into RSpec to incercept the call of when the example
> group "context" is being executed as an atomic unit?

This is something that rspec doesn't support with a formal API yet,
and until we formalize it this is subject to change. That said, I
think you're looking for the run() method in
Spec::Runner::ExampleGroupRunner.

Let me know if that gets you what you're looking for.

>
> Thanks for your help in advance.
>
> Joe Ocampo
> agilejoe.lostechies.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From agilejoe at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 11:23:29 2009
From: agilejoe at gmail.com (Joe Ocampo)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 10:23:29 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Example group parallel execution
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906050807g712fdecep65e7d3b7280c5cc7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <93cf9750906050744s686a7c55g29e98fdebd2e109e@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906050807g712fdecep65e7d3b7280c5cc7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <93cf9750906050823j7722d142s9168b3409c331e4e@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks David!

I will be sure to let you know our progress.

Joe Ocampo
agilejoe.lostechies.com


On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:07 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Joe Ocampo <agilejoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> > So I am working on a project right now where we are combining Selenium
> and
> > RSpec.  It was working really well until we implemented the grid and
> started
> > to do parallel execution on the specs to help speed things up. We are
> > rolling are own framework as DeepTest did not really provide the
> facilities
> > we were hoping.
> >
> > Our problem is that we have mutiple context per file.  Currently the
> Thread
> > runner executes the files in paralle per file. As you can imagine this
> isn't
> > very efficient once the grid executes it, as it simply turns a prallel
> > prococess back into a serial one once it parses the file.  My question is
> > where should I hook into RSpec to incercept the call of when the example
> > group "context" is being executed as an atomic unit?
>
> This is something that rspec doesn't support with a formal API yet,
> and until we formalize it this is subject to change. That said, I
> think you're looking for the run() method in
> Spec::Runner::ExampleGroupRunner.
>
> Let me know if that gets you what you're looking for.
>
> >
> > Thanks for your help in advance.
> >
> > Joe Ocampo
> > agilejoe.lostechies.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090605/f88de247/attachment.html>

From Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com  Fri Jun  5 11:40:07 2009
From: Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com (Lee)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 08:40:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Layouts and Sessions?
Message-ID: <bd46abd0-9cd1-496a-ba4c-b651ec3b9f3b@q2g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>

I am driving out a view and I want to test that a link is displayed.

The link_to code for the link is included in the layout for the view
rather than the view template itself.

Here's my example:

  it "should display a link to create a new zone" do
    render "contexts/index.html.erb", :layout => "layouts/
contexts.html.erb"
    response.should contain("sign out")
  end

Firstly, my experiments suggest that the layout is only rendered if
the :layout attribute is included in the call to render. Is my
understanding correct?

Secondly, the link_to code only executes if the session contains a
piece of data (member id). How do I set up the session data in my view
spec?

Thanks.

From Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com  Fri Jun  5 11:54:00 2009
From: Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com (Lee)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 08:54:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Am I specifying too much?
Message-ID: <6b81ab17-7935-431e-b846-fe1d2bf3b0f7@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>

I am driving out a view that renders a list of items with which a
logged in member is associated.

Against each item, one or more links may be rendered according to the
member's role with respect to the item (item owner, item
administrator, regular user etc). Each link represents a type of
function that the member can perform on the item (edit, delete, invite
etc), and the range of functions may differ across the items according
to the member's role for each item.

When specifying the view, should I include examples to specify which
links should appear against an item for each potential role of a
member? Or is this going too far?

Here is an example list for a member:

item 1  view edit delete (member is the owner of this item)
item 2  view edit invite (member a regular user of this item)
item 3  view (member has no role association with this item but can
view it)

Thanks.

From sfeley at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 12:25:10 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 12:25:10 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Am I specifying too much?
In-Reply-To: <6b81ab17-7935-431e-b846-fe1d2bf3b0f7@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
References: <6b81ab17-7935-431e-b846-fe1d2bf3b0f7@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906050925v714ad6eev9e42de2ee96eff59@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Lee<Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> When specifying the view, should I include examples to specify which
> links should appear against an item for each potential role of a
> member? Or is this going too far?

It depends.  If you're doing full BDD on your view, using RSpec as a
design tool to plan the view before (or while) you create it, that
sounds totally appropriate.  Role-based hyperlinks sound like
important business features, not cosmetics or cruft, so they should be
declared and tested *somewhere* for sure.  If you do it this way, you
should make sure you're only testing the view's code, i.e. the
existence of the link, and not the logic that decides who can do what.
 (Which isn't the proper job for a view.)

That said, view specs at a unit level tend to be a bit of a drag, and
many people skip them in favor of testing views at an integration
level.  You could put the same tests into Cucumber, or even a Selenium
or Watir browser suite, and drive it without having to set up all
those mock models in the view spec.

It isn't a *bad* idea to spec the views too, though.  You don't lose
anything but time, and you may gain that back if the operation is a
sensitive one.  When I make decisions about whether to test
controllers or views in RSpec, I usually think about whether the code
is doing anything particularly complex or unusual, or if something in
it is exceptionally likely to break.  (And then, if either of those is
true, I think about whether I could simplify those vulnerabilities out
by reexamining my assumptions.)  >8->




-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From sfeley at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 12:39:56 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 12:39:56 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Layouts and Sessions?
In-Reply-To: <bd46abd0-9cd1-496a-ba4c-b651ec3b9f3b@q2g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>
References: <bd46abd0-9cd1-496a-ba4c-b651ec3b9f3b@q2g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906050939i71326272k35bd6b54a7850641@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Lee<Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Firstly, my experiments suggest that the layout is only rendered if
> the :layout attribute is included in the call to render. Is my
> understanding correct?

Yes, and it's the way things should be.  I suggest writing a separate
spec for the layout, and testing its behavior separate from the view.
After all, you're *unit* testing here.  And the layout is a separate
unit.


> Secondly, the link_to code only executes if the session contains a
> piece of data (member id). How do I set up the session data in my view
> spec?

With the session[] object, e.g. "session[:foo] = bar".  See:
http://rspec.info/rails/writing/views.html

Whether the view (or layout) should be looking directly into the
session and making decisions from what it sees, instead of trusting
what it gets from the controller, is another question.  "Is there a
current user?" is _probably_ closer to your actual business rules than
"Does the session contain a member id?"



-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 13:04:50 2009
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 13:04:50 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Am I specifying too much?
In-Reply-To: <6b81ab17-7935-431e-b846-fe1d2bf3b0f7@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
References: <6b81ab17-7935-431e-b846-fe1d2bf3b0f7@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <85d99afe0906051004v749f3fe8w62cfd36c5041f0d6@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Lee<Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com> wrote:
> I am driving out a view that renders a list of items with which a
> logged in member is associated.
>
> Against each item, one or more links may be rendered according to the
> member's role with respect to the item (item owner, item
> administrator, regular user etc). Each link represents a type of
> function that the member can perform on the item (edit, delete, invite
> etc), and the range of functions may differ across the items according
> to the member's role for each item.
>
> When specifying the view, should I include examples to specify which
> links should appear against an item for each potential role of a
> member? Or is this going too far?

I don't think it's going to far. If certain links should not show up
in some cases, but should in others, I would provide an example for
those. If it's important enough to hide, it's important enough to make
sure it's hidden for the right reasons.

>
> Here is an example list for a member:
>
> item 1 ?view edit delete (member is the owner of this item)
> item 2 ?view edit invite (member a regular user of this item)
> item 3 ?view (member has no role association with this item but can
> view it)

I would probably drive these with a view spec that looked like this....

describe "your/view" do
  it "should always have a link to view the item"

  context "when the member owns the item" do
    it "should have a link to edit the item"

    it "should have a link to delete the item"
  end


  context "when the member owns the item" do
    it "should have a link to edit the item"

    it "should have a link to invite ..."
  end
end



>
> Thanks.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>



-- 
Zach Dennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com (personal)
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com (hire me)
http://ideafoundry.info/behavior-driven-development (first rate BDD training)
@zachdennis (twitter)

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun  5 16:28:40 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Fernando Perez)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 22:28:40 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] response.should be_success -- what does this
	prove?
In-Reply-To: <9E2ED486-1F59-4C9D-A13A-971D9C7D08C5@mattwynne.net>
References: <50873a360906050536m5eda4d88q6e7259f3f4ba5098@mail.gmail.com>
	<9E2ED486-1F59-4C9D-A13A-971D9C7D08C5@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <358301607ac99a7d13a5e12f58c995a1@ruby-forum.com>

> It's useful when you're doing TDD as it's the simplest thing to expect
> a controller to do. If you break something it's also quite a nice
> first-failure to have.
Hmm, I'm not sure about that. If the view fails to render, then Rails 
returns the error page,
i.e: response.should be_success is total crap.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun  5 16:29:30 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Fernando Perez)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 22:29:30 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mocking find_by_sql
Message-ID: <c58818a1cc8456d72c4dcbc1412bf48f@ruby-forum.com>

Hi, I cannot manage to mock a call to find_by_sql. Which class is
actually getting called? It is not the model, and I tried ActiveRecord
which didn't work either.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun  5 16:33:56 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Fernando Perez)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 22:33:56 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mocking find_by_sql
In-Reply-To: <c58818a1cc8456d72c4dcbc1412bf48f@ruby-forum.com>
References: <c58818a1cc8456d72c4dcbc1412bf48f@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <620e1158085ef951d2036e4e60f475a8@ruby-forum.com>

Damn I can't mock will_paginate's paginate method either!!!
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From mauricio.linhares at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 16:53:09 2009
From: mauricio.linhares at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Maur=EDcio_Linhares?=)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 17:53:09 -0300
Subject: [rspec-users] Given/When/Then blocks on Cucumber
Message-ID: <cb7586fa0906051353y233903a9jc7606faf620a3724@mail.gmail.com>

Hello guys,

I've been looking at Pyccuracy and found the "Given/Then/When" blocks
to be very interesting and easier to understand and write, specially
when writting scenarios with more than one of those. An example can be
found here: http://www.pyccuracy.org/getting_started_3.html

Here's how they do:

Scenario 1 - Searching for Hello World
Given
  I go to "http://www.google.com"
When
  I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
  And I click "btnG" button
Then
  I see "Hello World - Google Search" title

And here's how we would do with Cucumber

Scenario: Searching for Hello World
  Given I go to "http://www.google.com"
  When  I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
  When  I click "btnG" button
  Then I see "Hello World - Google Search" title

With cucumber we need to repeat the When's, Then's and Given's if
there's more than one, woudn't it be nice to avoid this?

-
Maur?cio Linhares
http://alinhavado.wordpress.com/ (pt-br) |
http://codeshooter.wordpress.com/ (en)

From ben at benmabey.com  Fri Jun  5 17:00:50 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:00:50 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Given/When/Then blocks on Cucumber
In-Reply-To: <cb7586fa0906051353y233903a9jc7606faf620a3724@mail.gmail.com>
References: <cb7586fa0906051353y233903a9jc7606faf620a3724@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A298782.90503@benmabey.com>

Maur?cio Linhares wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> I've been looking at Pyccuracy and found the "Given/Then/When" blocks
> to be very interesting and easier to understand and write, specially
> when writting scenarios with more than one of those. An example can be
> found here: http://www.pyccuracy.org/getting_started_3.html
>
> Here's how they do:
>
> Scenario 1 - Searching for Hello World
> Given
>   I go to "http://www.google.com"
> When
>   I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
>   And I click "btnG" button
> Then
>   I see "Hello World - Google Search" title
>
> And here's how we would do with Cucumber
>
> Scenario: Searching for Hello World
>   Given I go to "http://www.google.com"
>   When  I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
>   When  I click "btnG" button
>   Then I see "Hello World - Google Search" title
>
> With cucumber we need to repeat the When's, Then's and Given's if
> there's more than one, woudn't it be nice to avoid this?
>   

Yep, and you can... (since Cucumber started you've been able to do this)

You can use "And" and "But":

Scenario: Searching for Hello World
  Given I go to "http://www.google.com"
  When  I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
  And  I click "btnG" button
  Then I see "Hello World - Google Search" title
  But I should not see "Whatever"


-Ben

From ben at benmabey.com  Fri Jun  5 17:02:03 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 15:02:03 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Given/When/Then blocks on Cucumber
In-Reply-To: <cb7586fa0906051353y233903a9jc7606faf620a3724@mail.gmail.com>
References: <cb7586fa0906051353y233903a9jc7606faf620a3724@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A2987CB.3060007@benmabey.com>

Maur?cio Linhares wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> I've been looking at Pyccuracy and found the "Given/Then/When" blocks
> to be very interesting and easier to understand and write, specially
> when writting scenarios with more than one of those. An example can be
> found here: http://www.pyccuracy.org/getting_started_3.html
>
> Here's how they do:
>
> Scenario 1 - Searching for Hello World
> Given
>   I go to "http://www.google.com"
> When
>   I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
>   And I click "btnG" button
> Then
>   I see "Hello World - Google Search" title
>
> And here's how we would do with Cucumber
>
> Scenario: Searching for Hello World
>   Given I go to "http://www.google.com"
>   When  I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
>   When  I click "btnG" button
>   Then I see "Hello World - Google Search" title
>
> With cucumber we need to repeat the When's, Then's and Given's if
> there's more than one, woudn't it be nice to avoid this?
>
> -
> Maur?cio Linhares
> http://alinhavado.wordpress.com/ (pt-br) |
> http://codeshooter.wordpress.com/ (en)
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>   

BTW, please use the new Cucumber ML for cucumber related posts:

http://groups.google.com/group/cukes

-Ben

From joe at josephwilk.net  Fri Jun  5 17:03:33 2009
From: joe at josephwilk.net (Joseph Wilk)
Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2009 22:03:33 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Given/When/Then blocks on Cucumber
In-Reply-To: <cb7586fa0906051353y233903a9jc7606faf620a3724@mail.gmail.com>
References: <cb7586fa0906051353y233903a9jc7606faf620a3724@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A298825.4060406@josephwilk.net>

Maur?cio Linhares wrote:
> Hello guys,
>
> I've been looking at Pyccuracy and found the "Given/Then/When" blocks
> to be very interesting and easier to understand and write, specially
> when writting scenarios with more than one of those. An example can be
> found here: http://www.pyccuracy.org/getting_started_3.html
>
> Here's how they do:
>
> Scenario 1 - Searching for Hello World
> Given
>   I go to "http://www.google.com"
> When
>   I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
>   And I click "btnG" button
> Then
>   I see "Hello World - Google Search" title
>
> And here's how we would do with Cucumber
>
> Scenario: Searching for Hello World
>   Given I go to "http://www.google.com"
>   When  I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
>   When  I click "btnG" button
>   Then I see "Hello World - Google Search" title
>
> With cucumber we need to repeat the When's, Then's and Given's if
> there's more than one, woudn't it be nice to avoid this?
>   

We don't have to repeat ourselves in Cucumber:

Scenario: Searching for Hello World
  Given I go to "http://www.google.com"
  When  I fill "q" textbox with "Hello World"
  And  I click "btnG" button
  Then I see "Hello World - Google Search" title

While the block idea is interesting the key thing for me is the scenario 
reads like prose.

Also we have moved Cuke to its own mailing list, so please send any 
Cucumber related questions there.

http://groups.google.com/group/cukes?pli=1

Thanks!
--
Joseph Wilk
http://blog.josephwilk.net

> -
> Maur?cio Linhares
> http://alinhavado.wordpress.com/ (pt-br) |
> http://codeshooter.wordpress.com/ (en)
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
>   


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 17:04:07 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 16:04:07 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mocking find_by_sql
In-Reply-To: <c58818a1cc8456d72c4dcbc1412bf48f@ruby-forum.com>
References: <c58818a1cc8456d72c4dcbc1412bf48f@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906051404t2b25e96ar9cee6ec488340274@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Fernando Perez <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Hi, I cannot manage to mock a call to find_by_sql. Which class is
> actually getting called? It is not the model, and I tried ActiveRecord
> which didn't work either.

It's the model's class:

class Foo < AR::Base; end

describe Foo do
  it "...." do
    Foo.should_receive(:find_by_sql) ....

HTH,
David

> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 17:05:30 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 16:05:30 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mocking find_by_sql
In-Reply-To: <620e1158085ef951d2036e4e60f475a8@ruby-forum.com>
References: <c58818a1cc8456d72c4dcbc1412bf48f@ruby-forum.com>
	<620e1158085ef951d2036e4e60f475a8@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906051405j3a577030wed86d9d37a085a32@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Fernando Perez <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Damn I can't mock will_paginate's paginate method either!!!

Same deal as your other post about find_by_sql. Set the message
expectation on the method on the class:

Post.should_receive(:paginate)

> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From sfeley at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 17:36:32 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 17:36:32 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Am I specifying too much?
In-Reply-To: <298c4d2a0906051353y51f694acs6292872413a8c6d6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b81ab17-7935-431e-b846-fe1d2bf3b0f7@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
	<85d99afe0906051004v749f3fe8w62cfd36c5041f0d6@mail.gmail.com>
	<298c4d2a0906051353y51f694acs6292872413a8c6d6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906051436r452cc87m9b027caa1b2d07e4@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Charlie Bowman<charlesmbowman at gmail.com> wrote:
> I never spec my views.? I also never put conditional logic in the views.? If
> you have links that should show up sometimes and not others why not just
> move that logic into a helper or other associated class and test the method?

Good point.  But if one is really being completionist, it still makes
sense to check that the view is calling that helper.


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun  5 18:27:13 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Wolfram Arnold)
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 00:27:13 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Cucumber vs Rails Fixtures
In-Reply-To: <d10a0a5e851d2309adfbda4da696d28b@ruby-forum.com>
References: <gv1fhe$eg6$1@ger.gmane.org> <4A1445E1.3070204@benmabey.com>
	<d10a0a5e851d2309adfbda4da696d28b@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <14a9331d4a903b05e58342d0f4da53b9@ruby-forum.com>

The method I posted last week only works for Cucumber prior to 0.2.3.2.

For 0.2.3.2 and later, you cannot pass a block to the World more than 
once, and thus the new way would be (in env.rb):

module FixtureAccess

  def self.included(base)
    (class << base; self; end).class_eval do
      @@fixture_cache = {}
      fixtures.each do |table_name|
        table_name = table_name.to_s.tr('.', '_')
        define_method(table_name) do |*fixture_symbols|
          @@fixture_cache[table_name] ||= {}

          instances = fixture_symbols.map do |fixture_symbol|
            if fix = 
Fixtures.cached_fixtures(ActiveRecord::Base.connection, 
table_name)[fixture_symbol.to_s]
              @@fixture_cache[table_name][fixture_symbol] ||= fix.find 
# find model.find's the instance
            else
              raise StandardError, "No fixture with name 
'#{fixture_symbol}' found for table '#{table_name}'"
            end
          end
          instances.size == 1 ? instances.first : instances
        end
      end
    end
  end

end

... then ...

World(FixtureAccess)

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lenny at aps.org  Fri Jun  5 18:10:27 2009
From: lenny at aps.org (Lenny Marks)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 18:10:27 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Problems upgrading to Rails-2.3.2/Rspec 1.2.6
Message-ID: <99D2A806-00DF-429A-A0BF-B4A6EF18F583@aps.org>

jruby-1.3.0
rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6

I just ran into the 'Missing template' thing from the ticket below as  
well. Is it really that uncommon for a controller action to redirect  
or explicitly render a different template? Is it still considered  
'invalid'? Seems silly to have to create a bunch of blank templates.

https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/765-controller-spec-with-xhr-gives-template-missing-error

I was also running into a conflict between the version of the rack gem  
bundled with Rails 2.3.2 and the rack gem dependency from rspec-rails.  
When running my app I was getting the error below from POST requests  
that were expecting JSON back.

undefined method `split' for #<Mime::Type:0x7d429227>
     /Users/Shared/eds_test/share/RubyGems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/ 
lib/action_controller/mime_type.rb:206:in `method_missing'
     /Users/Shared/eds_test/share/RubyGems/1.8/gems/rack-1.0.0/lib/ 
rack/request.rb:51:in `media_type'

I'm not sure why it was picking up the rack-1.0.0 gem. I thought I  
checked out all the upgrade notes and I did re-run the rspec generator.

My solution was to remove the rack-1.0.0 gem and comment out the  
runtime dependency in the rspec-rails gemspec.

if Gem::Version.new(Gem::RubyGemsVersion) >= Gem::Version.new('1.2.0')  
then
       s.add_runtime_dependency(%q<rspec>, ["= 1.2.6"])
       #s.add_runtime_dependency(%q<rack>, [">= 0.4.0"])

Anyone have any better suggestions? Maybe I have something peculiar  
that others aren't hitting these issues?

Thanks,
-lenny




From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun  5 21:21:02 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Wolfram Arnold)
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 03:21:02 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Cucumber vs Rails Fixtures
In-Reply-To: <14a9331d4a903b05e58342d0f4da53b9@ruby-forum.com>
References: <gv1fhe$eg6$1@ger.gmane.org> <4A1445E1.3070204@benmabey.com>
	<d10a0a5e851d2309adfbda4da696d28b@ruby-forum.com>
	<14a9331d4a903b05e58342d0f4da53b9@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <c32e6eb51546b6f72d46d10e637d829a@ruby-forum.com>

This still wasn't fully working; I posted too soon.  See here for the 
final and working version: 
http://wiki.github.com/aslakhellesoy/cucumber/fixtures
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 23:30:52 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 22:30:52 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Problems upgrading to Rails-2.3.2/Rspec 1.2.6
In-Reply-To: <99D2A806-00DF-429A-A0BF-B4A6EF18F583@aps.org>
References: <99D2A806-00DF-429A-A0BF-B4A6EF18F583@aps.org>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906052030m755b0d3fv6725296f61293a09@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Lenny Marks <lenny at aps.org> wrote:
> jruby-1.3.0
> rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6
>
> I just ran into the 'Missing template' thing from the ticket below as well.
> Is it really that uncommon for a controller action to redirect or explicitly
> render a different template? Is it still considered 'invalid'? Seems silly
> to have to create a bunch of blank templates.
>
> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/765-controller-spec-with-xhr-gives-template-missing-error

I reopened the ticket.

>
> I was also running into a conflict between the version of the rack gem
> bundled with Rails 2.3.2 and the rack gem dependency from rspec-rails. When
> running my app I was getting the error below from POST requests that were
> expecting JSON back.
>
> undefined method `split' for #<Mime::Type:0x7d429227>
>
> ?/Users/Shared/eds_test/share/RubyGems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/mime_type.rb:206:in
> `method_missing'
>
> ?/Users/Shared/eds_test/share/RubyGems/1.8/gems/rack-1.0.0/lib/rack/request.rb:51:in
> `media_type'
>
> I'm not sure why it was picking up the rack-1.0.0 gem. I thought I checked
> out all the upgrade notes and I did re-run the rspec generator.
>
> My solution was to remove the rack-1.0.0 gem and comment out the runtime
> dependency in the rspec-rails gemspec.
>
> if Gem::Version.new(Gem::RubyGemsVersion) >= Gem::Version.new('1.2.0') then
> ? ? ?s.add_runtime_dependency(%q<rspec>, ["= 1.2.6"])
> ? ? ?#s.add_runtime_dependency(%q<rack>, [">= 0.4.0"])
>
> Anyone have any better suggestions? Maybe I have something peculiar that
> others aren't hitting these issues?
>
> Thanks,
> -lenny
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 23:38:56 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 22:38:56 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing my rails authentication controller
In-Reply-To: <004f01c9e619$a7466870$f5d33950$@com>
References: <004f01c9e619$a7466870$f5d33950$@com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906052038t588fb3b6h362a86bfd11e628c@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Wayne Andersen <waynea at clima-tech.com> wrote:
> I have a simple controller:
>
> class AccessController < ApplicationController
> ? def login
> ??? if request.post?
> ????? employee = Employee.authenticate(params[:name], params[:password])
> ????? if employee
> ??????? session[:employee_id] = employee.id
> ??????? redirect_to(:controller => "timesheets", :action => "index")
> ????? else
> ??????? flash.now[:notice] = "Invalid username/password combination"
> ????? end
> ??? end
> ? end
> end
>
> I have tried a number of ways to create a spec to test the login function,
> but am not having any luck.
>
> My current code looks something like this, but I don?t really understand
> what is going on here.
>
> ?? controller.should_receive(:login).with(no_args())

This line overrides the login action with a message expectation, so
the login action in the controller is never executed. What you want is
to stub the decision points and then set expectations about what
happens. For example:

it "assigns the employee id to the session if the employee is found" do
  Employee.stub(:authenticate).and_return(mock_model(Employee, :id => 37))
  post :login, params
  session[:employee_id].should == 37
end

Let me know if that is not self-explanatory and I'll explain.

Cheers,
David

> ?? post :login, params
> ?? session[:employee_id].should_not be_nil
>
> I am setting a simple expectation in the first line and then doing a post
> with params. I then check to see if the variable is in the session.
>
> What is the best way to make something like this work..
>
> Wayne L. Andersen

Hi Wayne,

In the firs tlin

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun  5 23:40:59 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 22:40:59 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Missing template in helper specs with a render
In-Reply-To: <298c4d2a0906041841t47189443u26a5b12a6b3833b8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <298c4d2a0906041841t47189443u26a5b12a6b3833b8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906052040j62de7b68va9db5fc28df35665@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Charlie Bowman <charlesmbowman at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a helper method that does a "render :partial".? The method works fine
> within the app (Rails 2.3.2).? In rspec (1.2.6) I get an error ("Missing
> template /comments/_comment.erb in view path"
> It seems that rspec when running helper tests doesn't set the view_path so
> rails doens't know where to look for the templates.? Is there a way to run
> helper specs with the same setup as controller specs?

There is no support for rendering in helper specs as of yet. Please
file a feature request if you think there should be. I have,
personally, never rendered from a helper. Anybody else?

>
> Charlie
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com  Sat Jun  6 01:01:44 2009
From: Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com (Lee)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 22:01:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Layouts and Sessions?
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906050939i71326272k35bd6b54a7850641@mail.gmail.com>
References: <bd46abd0-9cd1-496a-ba4c-b651ec3b9f3b@q2g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>
	<1fb4df0906050939i71326272k35bd6b54a7850641@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8faab528-324e-4b1a-9c83-0fe93a3fb772@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com>

Thanks Steve.

As suggested I started to wrtite a separate spec for the layout:

require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../../
spec_helper')

describe "layouts/contexts.html.erb" do

  it "should display a link to create a new zone" do
    render "layouts/contexts.html.erb"
  end

end

When I execute this, it complains of a missing method "sub_menu". This
method, along with others such as "main_menu", are called within the
layout. Unlike "main_menu" which is defined in my
"application_helper.rb" file, "sub_menu" is defined in the helper file
for the controller "contexts". How do I get the spec to "see" this
file and its contents when executed? I think It's seeing "main_menu".

Thanks.

On 5 June, 17:39, Stephen Eley <sfe... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Lee<Lee.Longm... at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Firstly, my experiments suggest that the layout is only rendered if
> > the :layout attribute is included in the call to render. Is my
> > understanding correct?
>
> Yes, and it's the way things should be. ?I suggest writing a separate
> spec for the layout, and testing its behavior separate from the view.
> After all, you're *unit* testing here. ?And the layout is a separate
> unit.
>
> > Secondly, the link_to code only executes if the session contains a
> > piece of data (member id). How do I set up the session data in my view
> > spec?
>
> With the session[] object, e.g. "session[:foo] = bar". ?See:http://rspec.info/rails/writing/views.html
>
> Whether the view (or layout) should be looking directly into the
> session and making decisions from what it sees, instead of trusting
> what it gets from the controller, is another question. ?"Is there a
> current user?" is _probably_ closer to your actual business rules than
> "Does the session contain a member id?"
>
> --
> Have Fun,
> ? ?Steve Eley (sfe... at gmail.com)
> ? ?ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
> ? ?http://www.escapepod.org
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com  Sat Jun  6 01:23:02 2009
From: Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com (Lee)
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2009 22:23:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Am I specifying too much?
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906051436r452cc87m9b027caa1b2d07e4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b81ab17-7935-431e-b846-fe1d2bf3b0f7@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
	<85d99afe0906051004v749f3fe8w62cfd36c5041f0d6@mail.gmail.com> 
	<298c4d2a0906051353y51f694acs6292872413a8c6d6@mail.gmail.com> 
	<1fb4df0906051436r452cc87m9b027caa1b2d07e4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8041babd-c009-4563-86e5-c40b2d791041@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>

Thank you everyone for your helpful insights.

I had already gone down the route suggested by Zach but it was
nevertheless very re-assuring to have my approach validated as I am a
newbie to RSpec. I did however consolidate my expectations e.g.:

  context "when the member is a privileged member of a zone" do

    it "should display links for functions (Create sub-zone, Invite
member, Invite non-member)" do
       .... "a" tag expectations for each expected link as well as the
use of :count to check the number of links e.g. function_links.should
have_selector("li", :count => 4)

To Charlie's point, I do call a helper from my view to avoid
cluttering the view e.g.

  def function_links_for(functions, member, context)
    contents = content_tag(:li, link_to("Enter zone",
member_context_path(member, context)))
    functions.each do | function |
      case function.name
        when "ManageZone"
          contents << content_tag(:li, link_to("Manage zone",
edit_member_context_path(member, context)))
        when "RemoveZone"
        ....

'functions' is an array of Function objects valid for member and his/
her role for a given context (item).

But I opted not to test this explicitly but, I confess, on the basis
that Chapter 22 "Rails Helpers" in The RSpec Book is not yet written!

Thanks.

On 5 June, 22:36, Stephen Eley <sfe... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Charlie Bowman<charlesmbow... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I never spec my views.? I also never put conditional logic in the views.? If
> > you have links that should show up sometimes and not others why not just
> > move that logic into a helper or other associated class and test the method?
>
> Good point. ?But if one is really being completionist, it still makes
> sense to check that the view is calling that helper.
>
> --
> Have Fun,
> ? ?Steve Eley (sfe... at gmail.com)
> ? ?ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
> ? ?http://www.escapepod.org
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sat Jun  6 05:16:49 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Fernando Perez)
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 11:16:49 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mocking find_by_sql
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906051405j3a577030wed86d9d37a085a32@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c58818a1cc8456d72c4dcbc1412bf48f@ruby-forum.com>
	<620e1158085ef951d2036e4e60f475a8@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906051405j3a577030wed86d9d37a085a32@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5b5e57e72e2ad1f991722e2d86558814@ruby-forum.com>

> Same deal as your other post about find_by_sql. Set the message
> expectation on the method on the class:
> 
> Post.should_receive(:paginate)

Unfortunately it doesn't work :-( I'll have to dive into the 
will_paginate source code to find out how it plugs itself in AR.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sat Jun  6 07:06:01 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 06:06:01 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Layouts and Sessions?
In-Reply-To: <8faab528-324e-4b1a-9c83-0fe93a3fb772@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com>
References: <bd46abd0-9cd1-496a-ba4c-b651ec3b9f3b@q2g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>
	<1fb4df0906050939i71326272k35bd6b54a7850641@mail.gmail.com>
	<8faab528-324e-4b1a-9c83-0fe93a3fb772@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906060406nfc765d6p215f0a5fd1fb927@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Lee <Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Steve.
>
> As suggested I started to wrtite a separate spec for the layout:
>
> require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../../
> spec_helper')
>
> describe "layouts/contexts.html.erb" do
>
> ?it "should display a link to create a new zone" do
> ? ?render "layouts/contexts.html.erb"
> ?end
>
> end
>
> When I execute this, it complains of a missing method "sub_menu". This
> method, along with others such as "main_menu", are called within the
> layout. Unlike "main_menu" which is defined in my
> "application_helper.rb" file, "sub_menu" is defined in the helper file
> for the controller "contexts". How do I get the spec to "see" this
> file and its contents when executed? I think It's seeing "main_menu".

http://rspec.rubyforge.org/rspec-rails/1.2.6/classes/Spec/Rails/Example/ViewExampleGroup.html#M000049


>
> Thanks.
>
> On 5 June, 17:39, Stephen Eley <sfe... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Lee<Lee.Longm... at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Firstly, my experiments suggest that the layout is only rendered if
>> > the :layout attribute is included in the call to render. Is my
>> > understanding correct?
>>
>> Yes, and it's the way things should be. ?I suggest writing a separate
>> spec for the layout, and testing its behavior separate from the view.
>> After all, you're *unit* testing here. ?And the layout is a separate
>> unit.
>>
>> > Secondly, the link_to code only executes if the session contains a
>> > piece of data (member id). How do I set up the session data in my view
>> > spec?
>>
>> With the session[] object, e.g. "session[:foo] = bar". ?See:http://rspec.info/rails/writing/views.html
>>
>> Whether the view (or layout) should be looking directly into the
>> session and making decisions from what it sees, instead of trusting
>> what it gets from the controller, is another question. ?"Is there a
>> current user?" is _probably_ closer to your actual business rules than
>> "Does the session contain a member id?"
>>
>> --
>> Have Fun,
>> ? ?Steve Eley (sfe... at gmail.com)
>> ? ?ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
>> ? ?http://www.escapepod.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From matt at mattwynne.net  Sat Jun  6 07:16:59 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 12:16:59 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Missing template in helper specs with a render
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906052040j62de7b68va9db5fc28df35665@mail.gmail.com>
References: <298c4d2a0906041841t47189443u26a5b12a6b3833b8@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906052040j62de7b68va9db5fc28df35665@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3D53E049-CB10-467B-8667-1E4E894C2403@mattwynne.net>


On 6 Jun 2009, at 04:40, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Charlie Bowman <charlesmbowman at gmail.com 
> > wrote:
>> I have a helper method that does a "render :partial".  The method  
>> works fine
>> within the app (Rails 2.3.2).  In rspec (1.2.6) I get an error  
>> ("Missing
>> template /comments/_comment.erb in view path"
>> It seems that rspec when running helper tests doesn't set the  
>> view_path so
>> rails doens't know where to look for the templates.  Is there a way  
>> to run
>> helper specs with the same setup as controller specs?
>
> There is no support for rendering in helper specs as of yet. Please
> file a feature request if you think there should be. I have,
> personally, never rendered from a helper. Anybody else?

Yep, I quite often have helper methods that wrap a call to  
render_partial, but they'd just get tested as part of the main view  
render, or by the cukes.

Matt Wynne
http://blog.mattwynne.net
http://www.songkick.com


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sat Jun  6 07:40:21 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 06:40:21 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Example group parallel execution
In-Reply-To: <93cf9750906050823j7722d142s9168b3409c331e4e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <93cf9750906050744s686a7c55g29e98fdebd2e109e@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906050807g712fdecep65e7d3b7280c5cc7@mail.gmail.com>
	<93cf9750906050823j7722d142s9168b3409c331e4e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906060440t7aa7e8fcn21308e0ea1b48870@mail.gmail.com>

Hey Joe - you can actually write your own runner and plug it in from
the command line with --runner. I forgot about this (it's been a long
time since anybody has brought it up).

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Joe Ocampo <agilejoe at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks David!
>
> I will be sure to let you know our progress.
>
> Joe Ocampo
> agilejoe.lostechies.com
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 10:07 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 9:44 AM, Joe Ocampo <agilejoe at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > So I am working on a project right now where we are combining Selenium
>> > and
>> > RSpec.? It was working really well until we implemented the grid and
>> > started
>> > to do parallel execution on the specs to help speed things up. We are
>> > rolling are own framework as DeepTest did not really provide the
>> > facilities
>> > we were hoping.
>> >
>> > Our problem is that we have mutiple context per file.? Currently the
>> > Thread
>> > runner executes the files in paralle per file. As you can imagine this
>> > isn't
>> > very efficient once the grid executes it, as it simply turns a prallel
>> > prococess back into a serial one once it parses the file.? My question
>> > is
>> > where should I hook into RSpec to incercept the call of when the example
>> > group "context" is being executed as an atomic unit?
>>
>> This is something that rspec doesn't support with a formal API yet,
>> and until we formalize it this is subject to change. That said, I
>> think you're looking for the run() method in
>> Spec::Runner::ExampleGroupRunner.
>>
>> Let me know if that gets you what you're looking for.
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks for your help in advance.
>> >
>> > Joe Ocampo
>> > agilejoe.lostechies.com
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rspec-users mailing list
>> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From jona.hunt777 at gmail.com  Sat Jun  6 11:31:08 2009
From: jona.hunt777 at gmail.com (Hunt Jon)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 00:31:08 +0900
Subject: [rspec-users] Mocking find_by_sql
In-Reply-To: <5b5e57e72e2ad1f991722e2d86558814@ruby-forum.com>
References: <c58818a1cc8456d72c4dcbc1412bf48f@ruby-forum.com>
	<620e1158085ef951d2036e4e60f475a8@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906051405j3a577030wed86d9d37a085a32@mail.gmail.com>
	<5b5e57e72e2ad1f991722e2d86558814@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <5e1f1f1f0906060831w47b13117oa4b4a14f67611d3d@mail.gmail.com>

You might not be understanding the usage of mock very well.

From charlesmbowman at gmail.com  Sat Jun  6 18:34:17 2009
From: charlesmbowman at gmail.com (Charlie Bowman)
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 15:34:17 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Missing template in helper specs with a render
In-Reply-To: <1244271633.18900.5.camel@ip6-localhost>
References: <298c4d2a0906041841t47189443u26a5b12a6b3833b8@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906052040j62de7b68va9db5fc28df35665@mail.gmail.com>
	<1244271633.18900.5.camel@ip6-localhost>
Message-ID: <C593A1DD-4530-475F-8A83-F1A85B644269@gmail.com>

I consider an if statement in the view layer a bug. I often need to  
conditionally render a partial and a helper is a great way to  
construct that condition.  Im currently stubing the call to render but  
I only like stub when absolutely necessary.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 6, 2009, at 12:00 AM, Hans de Graaff <hans at degraaff.org> wrote:

> On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 22:40 -0500, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>> There is no support for rendering in helper specs as of yet. Please
>> file a feature request if you think there should be. I have,
>> personally, never rendered from a helper. Anybody else?
>
> We do this for example to render a set of unrelated items into a  
> single
> timeline-based view. The helper sorts out the ordering and renders  
> each
> object in it using a specific partial.
>
> Hans
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From sfeley at gmail.com  Sat Jun  6 19:08:57 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2009 19:08:57 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Driving Out A View - Layouts and Sessions?
In-Reply-To: <8faab528-324e-4b1a-9c83-0fe93a3fb772@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com>
References: <bd46abd0-9cd1-496a-ba4c-b651ec3b9f3b@q2g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>
	<1fb4df0906050939i71326272k35bd6b54a7850641@mail.gmail.com>
	<8faab528-324e-4b1a-9c83-0fe93a3fb772@l32g2000vba.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906061608i74721dd3h4414ed9216ee1f86@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 1:01 AM, Lee<Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> When I execute this, it complains of a missing method "sub_menu". This
> method, along with others such as "main_menu", are called within the
> layout. Unlike "main_menu" which is defined in my
> "application_helper.rb" file, "sub_menu" is defined in the helper file
> for the controller "contexts". How do I get the spec to "see" this
> file and its contents when executed? I think It's seeing "main_menu".

Just require it and then include it.  A "describe" block is really
just a prettified form of class definition, so you can include any
modules you like in it.

Although (warning: continued smartassery here) I'm also wondering why
it's a good idea to call a method defined in a specific controller's
helper from a global layout.  Is this layout only used by that
controller?  If not, why isn't the method in application helpers?



-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Sun Jun  7 01:02:07 2009
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 01:02:07 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Missing template in helper specs with a render
In-Reply-To: <C593A1DD-4530-475F-8A83-F1A85B644269@gmail.com>
References: <298c4d2a0906041841t47189443u26a5b12a6b3833b8@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906052040j62de7b68va9db5fc28df35665@mail.gmail.com>
	<1244271633.18900.5.camel@ip6-localhost>
	<C593A1DD-4530-475F-8A83-F1A85B644269@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <85d99afe0906062202w1c1b5863q132150b955b9d059@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Charlie Bowman<charlesmbowman at gmail.com> wrote:
> I consider an if statement in the view layer a bug.

Perhaps we can consider it a possible code smell? It's not really a
bug unless it's producing incorrect or unexpected result in the
application's behaviour.


> I often need to
> conditionally render a partial and a helper is a great way to construct that
> condition. Im currently stubing the call to render but I only like stub
> when absolutely necessary.

Helpers can be a great way to organize some of the view's
implementation, although my goal isn't to move every conditional out
of the view, it's to avoid having unnecessary logic in the view. When
I work outside-in I'm able to push logic that doesn't belong in the
view into a presenter or further down to a model with a good method
name. The logic that is left in the view is very minimal and
ultra-simple. I find it easy to spec and it doesn't impede the life or
maintainability of the view.

For example, if I need to display a piece of information for an admin,
but not a normal user then I have no problem doing the "if
current_user.admin?" check in a view:

   <% if current_user.admin? %>
      Foo bar baz
   <% end %>

The check itself is already ultra-simple and it reads very well. What
value would we get from moving this to a helper method? It's currently
easy to open the view and know that "Foo bar baz" will only be
rendered for an admin. Does moving this to
"display_foo_bar_baz_for_admin" really give us anything?

There's a cost to creating a helper method for every one-off
condition. There's also a cost for turning every snippet of markup
that shows up in a simple view condition into a partial. The cost is
in the disconnect and separation that comes from doing separating
these pieces that go together as well as the organization nightmare of
a plethora of helper methods and partials.

I like extracting helpers when it provides more value than burden.
When it doesn't I will leave the small, ultra-simple logic in the
view,

Zach

>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 6, 2009, at 12:00 AM, Hans de Graaff <hans at degraaff.org> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 22:40 -0500, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>
>>> There is no support for rendering in helper specs as of yet. Please
>>> file a feature request if you think there should be. I have,
>>> personally, never rendered from a helper. Anybody else?
>>
>> We do this for example to render a set of unrelated items into a single
>> timeline-based view. The helper sorts out the ordering and renders each
>> object in it using a specific partial.
>>
>> Hans
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>



-- 
Zach Dennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com (personal)
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com (hire me)
http://ideafoundry.info/behavior-driven-development (first rate BDD training)
@zachdennis (twitter)

From charlesmbowman at gmail.com  Sun Jun  7 04:24:44 2009
From: charlesmbowman at gmail.com (Charlie Bowman)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 01:24:44 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Missing template in helper specs with a render
In-Reply-To: <85d99afe0906062202w1c1b5863q132150b955b9d059@mail.gmail.com>
References: <298c4d2a0906041841t47189443u26a5b12a6b3833b8@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906052040j62de7b68va9db5fc28df35665@mail.gmail.com>
	<1244271633.18900.5.camel@ip6-localhost>
	<C593A1DD-4530-475F-8A83-F1A85B644269@gmail.com>
	<85d99afe0906062202w1c1b5863q132150b955b9d059@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A832701E-643C-4962-871F-AE429717626A@gmail.com>



Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 6, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Zach Dennis <zach.dennis at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 6:34 PM, Charlie Bowman<charlesmbowman at gmail.com 
> > wrote:
>> I consider an if statement in the view layer a bug.
>
> Perhaps we can consider it a possible code smell? It's not really a
> bug unless it's producing incorrect or unexpected result in the
> application's behaviour.

Absolutely true. Not really a bug but I find it helpful to treat it as  
such.
>
>
>> I often need to
>> conditionally render a partial and a helper is a great way to  
>> construct that
>> condition. Im currently stubing the call to render but I only like  
>> stub
>> when absolutely necessary.
>
> Helpers can be a great way to organize some of the view's
> implementation, although my goal isn't to move every conditional out
> of the view, it's to avoid having unnecessary logic in the view. When
> I work outside-in I'm able to push logic that doesn't belong in the
> view into a presenter or further down to a model with a good method
> name. The logic that is left in the view is very minimal and
> ultra-simple. I find it easy to spec and it doesn't impede the life or
> maintainability of the view.
>
> For example, if I need to display a piece of information for an admin,
> but not a normal user then I have no problem doing the "if
> current_user.admin?" check in a view:
>
>   <% if current_user.admin? %>
>      Foo bar baz
>   <% end

def foo_message
   "foo bar baz" if current_user.admin?
end

That's how I handle that. If for no other reason but easier testing.
>
>
> The check itself is already ultra-simple and it reads very well. What
> value would we get from moving this to a helper method? It's currently
> easy to open the view and know that "Foo bar baz" will only be
> rendered for an admin. Does moving this to
> "display_foo_bar_baz_for_admin" really give us anything?
>
> There's a cost to creating a helper method for every one-off
> condition. There's also a cost for turning every snippet of markup
> that shows up in a simple view condition into a partial. The cost is
> in the disconnect and separation that comes from doing separating
> these pieces that go together as well as the organization nightmare of
> a plethora of helper methods and partials.
>
> I like extracting helpers when it provides more value than burden.
> When it doesn't I will leave the small, ultra-simple logic in the
> view,
>
> Zach
>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jun 6, 2009, at 12:00 AM, Hans de Graaff <hans at degraaff.org>  
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 2009-06-05 at 22:40 -0500, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is no support for rendering in helper specs as of yet. Please
>>>> file a feature request if you think there should be. I have,
>>>> personally, never rendered from a helper. Anybody else?
>>>
>>> We do this for example to render a set of unrelated items into a  
>>> single
>>> timeline-based view. The helper sorts out the ordering and renders  
>>> each
>>> object in it using a specific partial.
>>>
>>> Hans
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Zach Dennis
> http://www.continuousthinking.com (personal)
> http://www.mutuallyhuman.com (hire me)
> http://ideafoundry.info/behavior-driven-development (first rate BDD  
> training)
> @zachdennis (twitter)
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From rick.denatale at gmail.com  Sun Jun  7 11:54:13 2009
From: rick.denatale at gmail.com (Rick DeNatale)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 11:54:13 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Missing template in helper specs with a render
In-Reply-To: <A832701E-643C-4962-871F-AE429717626A@gmail.com>
References: <298c4d2a0906041841t47189443u26a5b12a6b3833b8@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906052040j62de7b68va9db5fc28df35665@mail.gmail.com>
	<1244271633.18900.5.camel@ip6-localhost>
	<C593A1DD-4530-475F-8A83-F1A85B644269@gmail.com>
	<85d99afe0906062202w1c1b5863q132150b955b9d059@mail.gmail.com>
	<A832701E-643C-4962-871F-AE429717626A@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deb2337a0906070854s50563219ka130fbcb351e8b7e@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Charlie Bowman<charlesmbowman at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jun 6, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Zach Dennis <zach.dennis at gmail.com> wrote:

>> For example, if I need to display a piece of information for an admin,
>> but not a normal user then I have no problem doing the "if
>> current_user.admin?" check in a view:
>>
>> ?<% if current_user.admin? %>
>> ? ? Foo bar baz
>> ?<% end
>
> def foo_message
> ?"foo bar baz" if current_user.admin?
> end
>
> That's how I handle that. If for no other reason but easier testing.

But that refactoring is less intention revealing since it hides the
fact than only admins will see that message.

If I couldn't come up with a better name for foo_message which
revealed that, I'd probably prefer leaving the if test in the view.

Resolving the tensions between things like "dumb views" and "intention
revealing names" is why they pay us the big bucks! <G>

-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sun Jun  7 13:47:42 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Wolfram Arnold)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 19:47:42 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Cucumber vs Rails Fixtures
In-Reply-To: <ee6f48c00906051851vd3c050fwfb9497a441cc19f2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <gv1fhe$eg6$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<ee6f48c00906051851vd3c050fwfb9497a441cc19f2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8b6b60ae0ec63aba5c4a2508b9f5a368@ruby-forum.com>

Yi Wen wrote:
> I do this:
> 
> Fixtures.reset_cache
> fixtures_folder = File.join(RAILS_ROOT, 'test', 'fixtures')
> fixtures = Dir[File.join(fixtures_folder, '*.yml')].map {|f|
> File.basename(f, '.yml') }
> fixture_class_names = {} # or whatever needed
> Fixtures.create_fixtures(fixtures_folder, fixtures, fixture_class_names)

Sure, that'll load fixtures and let you access them, e.g. with:

User.find(1)

What I wanted is to be able to access fixtures with:

users(:john)

Hence all the heavy lifting.  It works now as described on the github 
wiki page.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From charlesmbowman at gmail.com  Sun Jun  7 13:52:37 2009
From: charlesmbowman at gmail.com (Charlie Bowman)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 10:52:37 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Missing template in helper specs with a render
In-Reply-To: <deb2337a0906070854s50563219ka130fbcb351e8b7e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <298c4d2a0906041841t47189443u26a5b12a6b3833b8@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906052040j62de7b68va9db5fc28df35665@mail.gmail.com>
	<1244271633.18900.5.camel@ip6-localhost>
	<C593A1DD-4530-475F-8A83-F1A85B644269@gmail.com>
	<85d99afe0906062202w1c1b5863q132150b955b9d059@mail.gmail.com>
	<A832701E-643C-4962-871F-AE429717626A@gmail.com>
	<deb2337a0906070854s50563219ka130fbcb351e8b7e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5AAF14EC-B5A6-4E92-B151-53FE38E7AF24@gmail.com>



Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 7, 2009, at 8:54 AM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Charlie Bowman<charlesmbowman at gmail.com 
> > wrote:
>> On Jun 6, 2009, at 10:02 PM, Zach Dennis <zach.dennis at gmail.com>  
>> wrote:
>
>>> For example, if I need to display a piece of information for an  
>>> admin,
>>> but not a normal user then I have no problem doing the "if
>>> current_user.admin?" check in a view:
>>>
>>>  <% if current_user.admin? %>
>>>     Foo bar baz
>>>  <% end
>>
>> def foo_message
>>  "foo bar baz" if current_user.admin?
>> end
>>
>> That's how I handle that. If for no other reason but easier testing.
>
> But that refactoring is less intention revealing since it hides the
> fact than only admins will see that message.
>
> If I couldn't come up with a better name for foo_message which
> revealed that, I'd probably prefer leaving the if test in the view.
>
> Resolving the tensions between things like "dumb views" and "intention
> revealing names" is why they pay us the big bucks! <G>
>
Agreed. Should be def foo_message_if_admin
And yes I know im being extreme with my view on conditional logic in  
views. I've found it very helpful to think this way about my views.  
Just by refactoring old code this way I've found and fixed bugs that  
hadn't even surfaced yet.

> -- 
> Rick DeNatale
>
> Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
> WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From lawrence.pit at gmail.com  Sun Jun  7 22:40:05 2009
From: lawrence.pit at gmail.com (lawrence.pit)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 19:40:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] before(:all)
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0905210446i31f9a12fl1dfdde4684538ed2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6fd630b3-7faf-40bc-9d30-284da2e89787@d38g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0905210446i31f9a12fl1dfdde4684538ed2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b460a352-4eb0-4c8f-9f49-2d05bb41fbad@r16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>

Hi,

I took a stab at this and created what I call Machinery. So far it
works great for me.

For those that are looking for a way to create objects in the database
in a before(:all) instead of a before(:each) to speed up tests, have a
look at:

http://github.com/lawrencepit/machinery


Cheers,
Lawrence

> > When I execute database actions within a before(:each) they are rolled
> > back after each example test has run.
>
> Nothing built in, and it's probably not something we'd support in
> rspec-rails, which simply wraps the transaction handling provided by
> rails, which rolls back after every test method (equivalent of an
> rspec example).
>
> You're not the first to have asked for this, so having a solution for
> it that would work with rails out of the box and with rspec would be
> helpful to the community. But I think that would have to be in a
> separate gem.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Mon Jun  8 01:21:29 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Salil Gaikwad)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 07:21:29 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] undefined local variable or method `params' for
	#<Spec
In-Reply-To: <e3e91d130904140651w60ba7083xe4913ac2e9fa9edb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ed9ac5e387e42729028fb9a481dde2d6@ruby-forum.com>
	<5a7105e9d4df55a9fc36081e16d7bd7a@ruby-forum.com>
	<eda7879d4e9120b3fae73c4244759aca@ruby-forum.com>
	<119ac056026d4734808fe19e77ec250a@ruby-forum.com>
	<c28a1eb3c447787b3becb72dea2828b8@ruby-forum.com>
	<e3e91d130904140651w60ba7083xe4913ac2e9fa9edb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2e979239105253b072431701a2102be1@ruby-forum.com>

Hi All,

Any Update on this topic.

I still not found any solution for a following method.

 it "should be active if controller is same" do
    tab_class('tab').should include('active')
  end


Regards,

Salil
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From 36srinu at gmail.com  Mon Jun  8 02:35:01 2009
From: 36srinu at gmail.com (srinu)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 23:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Rails 2.3.2, rspec routing errors
Message-ID: <76f2493d-0f5c-401d-8876-35fda4daae4b@n21g2000vba.googlegroups.com>

Hi,

  I have turned my rails application to new version 2.3.2, with this I
used to get fixtire_path error which was resolved by upgrading the
plugins spec/spec-rails.
  Now I struck up with Routing error to run the spec, the thing which
might because of routing specs. As I know

my spec version=1.2.6

 Any help will be appreciated.

Thanks
Srinivas

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun  8 08:32:51 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 07:32:51 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Rails 2.3.2, rspec routing errors
In-Reply-To: <23918822.post@talk.nabble.com>
References: <23918822.post@talk.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906080532q151043b6sbd91a41e4133246e@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 1:45 AM, 36srinu<36srinu at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, I have turned my rails application to new version 2.3.2, with this I
> used to get fixtire_path error which was resolved by upgrading the plugins
> spec/spec-rails. Now I struck up with Routing error to run the spec, the
> thing which might because of routing specs. As I know my spec version=1.2.6
> Any help will be appreciated. Thanks Srinivas

See if http://rspec.rubyforge.org/rspec-rails/1.2.6/files/Upgrade_rdoc.html
helps. If not, please post the specific failure messages you're
getting.

Thanks,
David

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun  8 08:50:30 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 07:50:30 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] undefined local variable or method `params' for
	#<Spec
In-Reply-To: <2e979239105253b072431701a2102be1@ruby-forum.com>
References: <ed9ac5e387e42729028fb9a481dde2d6@ruby-forum.com>
	<5a7105e9d4df55a9fc36081e16d7bd7a@ruby-forum.com>
	<eda7879d4e9120b3fae73c4244759aca@ruby-forum.com>
	<119ac056026d4734808fe19e77ec250a@ruby-forum.com>
	<c28a1eb3c447787b3becb72dea2828b8@ruby-forum.com>
	<e3e91d130904140651w60ba7083xe4913ac2e9fa9edb@mail.gmail.com>
	<2e979239105253b072431701a2102be1@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906080550n60ea45dbx9d9a1832e49a79fb@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Salil Gaikwad<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Any Update on this topic.
>
> I still not found any solution for a following method.
>
> ?it "should be active if controller is same" do
> ? ?tab_class('tab').should include('active')
> ?end

Please read http://wiki.github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/get-in-touch and
try again. There is a lot of missing context information here.

Thanks,
David

>
>
> Regards,
>
> Salil
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Mon Jun  8 09:31:45 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 15:31:45 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Amit Kulkarni <lists at ruby-forum.com> 
> wrote:
>>
>> ? end
>>
>> ? it "should create channel" do
>> ? ?Channel.should_receive(:new).with(:brand_name => "test"
>> ).and_return(@channel)
> 
> I *think* Rails converts the keys in this hash to strings. Try:
> 
> Channel.should_receive(:new).with('brand_name' => 'test').
>   and_return(@channel)
> 

Hi,

I tried with the above command but it still gives the same error.Dont 
know what is wrong.I am following the same which is given in the book
Details are as follows

require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper')

describe ChannelsController do
  describe "Channel Creation" do
    before(:each) do
      @channel = mock_model(Channel, :save => nil)
      Channel.stub!(:new).and_return(@channel)
    end

    it "should create channel" do
      Channel.should_receive(:new).with('brand_name' => 'manager' 
).and_return(@channel)
      post :create, :channel => {'brand_name' => 'manager' }
    end

    it "should save channel" do
      @channel.should_receive(:save)
      post :create
    end
  end


Following are the errors
{Please ignore the missing a's :-)}

ChnnelsController
  Chnnel Cretion
    should crete chnnel (FILED - 1)
    should sve chnnel (FILED - 2)

1)
Spec::Mocks::MockExpecttionError in 'ChnnelsController Chnnel Cretion 
should cre
te chnnel'
<Chnnel(id: integer, brnd_nme: string, logo_file_nme: string, 
logo_file_size: st
ring, logo_content_type: string, points: integer, rnk: integer, 
overruled_rnk: b
oolen, title: string, description: text, tgs: string, url: string, 
kit_file_nme:
 string, kit_file_size: string, kit_content_type: string, ctive: boolen, 
bg_colo
r: string, font_color: string, title_color: string, title_style: string, 
emotion
l_file_nme: string, emotionl_file_size: string, emotionl_content_type: 
string, n
cestor_id: integer, chnnel_ctegory_id: integer, creted_t: dtetime, 
updted_t: dte
time) (clss)> expected :new with ({"brnd_nme"=>"mnger"}) once, but 
received it 0
 times
./spec/controllers/chnnels_controller_spec.rb:183:
script/spec:4:

2)
Spec::Mocks::MockExpecttionError in 'ChnnelsController Chnnel Cretion 
should sve
 chnnel'
Mock 'Chnnel_1002' expected :sve with (ny rgs) once, but received it 0 
times
./spec/controllers/chnnels_controller_spec.rb:188:
script/spec:4:

Finished in 0.305 seconds

2 exmples, 2 filures


-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun  8 10:03:21 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 09:03:21 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Amit Kulkarni <lists at ruby-forum.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> ? end
>>>
>>> ? it "should create channel" do
>>> ? ?Channel.should_receive(:new).with(:brand_name => "test"
>>> ).and_return(@channel)
>>
>> I *think* Rails converts the keys in this hash to strings. Try:
>>
>> Channel.should_receive(:new).with('brand_name' => 'test').
>> ? and_return(@channel)
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> I tried with the above command but it still gives the same error.Dont
> know what is wrong.I am following the same which is given in the book
> Details are as follows
>
> require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper')
>
> describe ChannelsController do
> ?describe "Channel Creation" do
> ? ?before(:each) do
> ? ? ?@channel = mock_model(Channel, :save => nil)
> ? ? ?Channel.stub!(:new).and_return(@channel)
> ? ?end
>
> ? ?it "should create channel" do
> ? ? ?Channel.should_receive(:new).with('brand_name' => 'manager'
> ).and_return(@channel)
> ? ? ?post :create, :channel => {'brand_name' => 'manager' }
> ? ?end
>
> ? ?it "should save channel" do
> ? ? ?@channel.should_receive(:save)
> ? ? ?post :create
> ? ?end
> ?end

I went as far as to create a rails 2.1.2 project with rspec and
rspec-rails 1.2.4, copy your code into it and ran the specs. They both
pass. I don't have a Vista environment in which to test this, so
that's all I can do to help at the moment.

Anybody else running into similar problems on Vista?

>
>
> Following are the errors
> {Please ignore the missing a's :-)}
>
> ChnnelsController
> ?Chnnel Cretion
> ? ?should crete chnnel (FILED - 1)
> ? ?should sve chnnel (FILED - 2)
>
> 1)
> Spec::Mocks::MockExpecttionError in 'ChnnelsController Chnnel Cretion
> should cre
> te chnnel'
> <Chnnel(id: integer, brnd_nme: string, logo_file_nme: string,
> logo_file_size: st
> ring, logo_content_type: string, points: integer, rnk: integer,
> overruled_rnk: b
> oolen, title: string, description: text, tgs: string, url: string,
> kit_file_nme:
> ?string, kit_file_size: string, kit_content_type: string, ctive: boolen,
> bg_colo
> r: string, font_color: string, title_color: string, title_style: string,
> emotion
> l_file_nme: string, emotionl_file_size: string, emotionl_content_type:
> string, n
> cestor_id: integer, chnnel_ctegory_id: integer, creted_t: dtetime,
> updted_t: dte
> time) (clss)> expected :new with ({"brnd_nme"=>"mnger"}) once, but
> received it 0
> ?times
> ./spec/controllers/chnnels_controller_spec.rb:183:
> script/spec:4:
>
> 2)
> Spec::Mocks::MockExpecttionError in 'ChnnelsController Chnnel Cretion
> should sve
> ?chnnel'
> Mock 'Chnnel_1002' expected :sve with (ny rgs) once, but received it 0
> times
> ./spec/controllers/chnnels_controller_spec.rb:188:
> script/spec:4:
>
> Finished in 0.305 seconds
>
> 2 exmples, 2 filures



>
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Mon Jun  8 10:48:37 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 16:48:37 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> 
> wrote:
>>> I *think* Rails converts the keys in this hash to strings. Try:
>>
>>      Channel.should_receive(:new).with('brand_name' => 'manager'
>> ).and_return(@channel)
>>      post :create, :channel => {'brand_name' => 'manager' }
>>    end
>>
>>    it "should save channel" do
>>      @channel.should_receive(:save)
>>      post :create
>>    end
>>  end
> 
> I went as far as to create a rails 2.1.2 project with rspec and
> rspec-rails 1.2.4, copy your code into it and ran the specs. They both
> pass. I don't have a Vista environment in which to test this, so
> that's all I can do to help at the moment.
> 
> Anybody else running into similar problems on Vista?
> 

Thanks a lot for looking into the matter.I am not sure if i am getting 
this problem due to vista environment.If it is then i dont know what to 
do :-(

Also i didnt understand b the statement
"create a rails 2.1.2 project with rspec and rspec-rails 1.2.4, copy 
your code into it and ran the specs."

Also i checked my spec version it is 1.2.6,so does this causing the 
problem.
This version got updated from 1.2.4.
Please suggest.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun  8 11:01:27 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 10:01:27 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
	<f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:31 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> I *think* Rails converts the keys in this hash to strings. Try:
>>>
>>> ? ? ?Channel.should_receive(:new).with('brand_name' => 'manager'
>>> ).and_return(@channel)
>>> ? ? ?post :create, :channel => {'brand_name' => 'manager' }
>>> ? ?end
>>>
>>> ? ?it "should save channel" do
>>> ? ? ?@channel.should_receive(:save)
>>> ? ? ?post :create
>>> ? ?end
>>> ?end
>>
>> I went as far as to create a rails 2.1.2 project with rspec and
>> rspec-rails 1.2.4, copy your code into it and ran the specs. They both
>> pass. I don't have a Vista environment in which to test this, so
>> that's all I can do to help at the moment.
>>
>> Anybody else running into similar problems on Vista?
>>
>
> Thanks a lot for looking into the matter.I am not sure if i am getting
> this problem due to vista environment.If it is then i dont know what to
> do :-(
>
> Also i didnt understand b the statement
> "create a rails 2.1.2 project with rspec and rspec-rails 1.2.4, copy
> your code into it and ran the specs."

The versions  you cited earlier were rails 2.1.2 and rspec 1.2.4, so I
did the following:

* created a rails 2.1.2 project
* configured it to use rspec 1.2.4
* created a ChannelsController and a spec for it
* created a Channel model with a migration and ran the migration
* copied the code you posted in this thread to
app/controllers/channels_controller.rb and
spec/controllers/channels_controller_spec.rb
* ran the specs
* watched them pass

>
> Also i checked my spec version it is 1.2.6,so does this causing the
> problem.
> This version got updated from 1.2.4.
> Please suggest.

You stated above that you were using 1.2.4, but now you are saying you
are using 1.2.6. Please be sure to provide accurate information.

Do you have both rspec and rspec-rails? And are they both 1.2.6 now?

FYI - I get the same result from 1.2.6. All specs pass.



> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Mon Jun  8 11:10:28 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 17:10:28 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
	<f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ed798b6ad6cfbea7d1904c38441d5f65@ruby-forum.com>

> You stated above that you were using 1.2.4, but now you are saying you
> are using 1.2.6. Please be sure to provide accurate information.

I am sorry for the above information.Yes earlier the version was 1.2.4
but i installed rspec again and it installed the latest version i.e
1.2.6

> Do you have both rspec and rspec-rails? And are they both 1.2.6 now?
> Yes i have both rspec and rspec-rails as 1.2.6 and 1.2.4 installed.

> FYI - I get the same result from 1.2.6. All specs pass.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From ru_ghetto at rubyghetto.com  Mon Jun  8 23:33:17 2009
From: ru_ghetto at rubyghetto.com (ru_ghetto)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 20:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Adding specs to engines
Message-ID: <97f5463f-c7fc-4f7d-af64-54dfc2b118f5@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>

I am breaking an app into a bunch of rails 2.x style engine plugins.
The app is already tested with rspec and I am trying to figure out how
to get autotest or even rake spec to run the examples in the plugins.

Thanks for any information

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun  9 00:37:29 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 23:37:29 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Adding specs to engines
In-Reply-To: <97f5463f-c7fc-4f7d-af64-54dfc2b118f5@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
References: <97f5463f-c7fc-4f7d-af64-54dfc2b118f5@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906082137y471d24a1y9511801822240fb3@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 10:33 PM, ru_ghetto<ru_ghetto at rubyghetto.com> wrote:
> I am breaking an app into a bunch of rails 2.x style engine plugins.
> The app is already tested with rspec and I am trying to figure out how
> to get autotest or even rake spec to run the examples in the plugins.
>
> Thanks for any information

For plugins there is a rake spec:plugins task, but you can also roll
your own rake task pretty easily. Just take a look at all the
different spec tasks in lib/tasks/rspec.rake (generated when you ran
script/generate rspec). Also doco is here:

http://rspec.rubyforge.org/rspec/1.2.6/classes/Spec/Rake/SpecTask.html

HTH,
David

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun  9 02:19:44 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 08:19:44 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <ed798b6ad6cfbea7d1904c38441d5f65@ruby-forum.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
	<f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>
	<ed798b6ad6cfbea7d1904c38441d5f65@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <a139f832ac7863b0151267f3aba1b309@ruby-forum.com>

Amit Kulkarni wrote:
>> You stated above that you were using 1.2.4, but now you are saying you
>> are using 1.2.6. Please be sure to provide accurate information.
> 
> I am sorry for the above information.Yes earlier the version was 1.2.4
> but i installed rspec again and it installed the latest version i.e
> 1.2.6
> 
>> Do you have both rspec and rspec-rails? And are they both 1.2.6 now?
>> Yes i have both rspec and rspec-rails as 1.2.6 and 1.2.4 installed.
> 
>> FYI - I get the same result from 1.2.6. All specs pass.

Any Updates....
:-)
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun  9 07:58:10 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 06:58:10 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <a139f832ac7863b0151267f3aba1b309@ruby-forum.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
	<f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>
	<ed798b6ad6cfbea7d1904c38441d5f65@ruby-forum.com>
	<a139f832ac7863b0151267f3aba1b309@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906090458w1276878jd84d3cc52554b671@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 1:19 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Amit Kulkarni wrote:
>>> You stated above that you were using 1.2.4, but now you are saying you
>>> are using 1.2.6. Please be sure to provide accurate information.
>>
>> I am sorry for the above information.Yes earlier the version was 1.2.4
>> but i installed rspec again and it installed the latest version i.e
>> 1.2.6
>>
>>> Do you have both rspec and rspec-rails? And are they both 1.2.6 now?
>>> Yes i have both rspec and rspec-rails as 1.2.6 and 1.2.4 installed.
>>
>>> FYI - I get the same result from 1.2.6. All specs pass.
>
> Any Updates....
> :-)

Any Vista users in earshot? I've done all I can do on this.

From philodespotos at gmail.com  Tue Jun  9 10:05:03 2009
From: philodespotos at gmail.com (Kyle Hargraves)
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 09:05:03 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] before(:all)
In-Reply-To: <b460a352-4eb0-4c8f-9f49-2d05bb41fbad@r16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>
References: <6fd630b3-7faf-40bc-9d30-284da2e89787@d38g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0905210446i31f9a12fl1dfdde4684538ed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<b460a352-4eb0-4c8f-9f49-2d05bb41fbad@r16g2000vbn.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <60f3810c0906090705n29fd0964g8c28711cc69975fa@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 9:40 PM, lawrence.pit<lawrence.pit at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I took a stab at this and created what I call Machinery. So far it
> works great for me.
>
> For those that are looking for a way to create objects in the database
> in a before(:all) instead of a before(:each) to speed up tests, have a
> look at:
>
> http://github.com/lawrencepit/machinery

This plugin is *awesome*.

Thank you. =)

k

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun  9 10:27:15 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 16:27:15 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906090458w1276878jd84d3cc52554b671@mail.gmail.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
	<f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>
	<ed798b6ad6cfbea7d1904c38441d5f65@ruby-forum.com>
	<a139f832ac7863b0151267f3aba1b309@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906090458w1276878jd84d3cc52554b671@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <427c51acf5a09884ce63bc4f11742b10@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 1:19 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> 
> wrote:
>>>
>>>> FYI - I get the same result from 1.2.6. All specs pass.
>>
>> Any Updates....
>> :-)
> 
> Any Vista users in earshot? I've done all I can do on this.

Oh ok.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From tech at onghu.com  Tue Jun  9 11:30:29 2009
From: tech at onghu.com (Mohit Sindhwani)
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 23:30:29 +0800
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906090458w1276878jd84d3cc52554b671@mail.gmail.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>	<f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>	<57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>	<ed798b6ad6cfbea7d1904c38441d5f65@ruby-forum.com>	<a139f832ac7863b0151267f3aba1b309@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906090458w1276878jd84d3cc52554b671@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A2E8015.2060005@onghu.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 1:19 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>   
>> Amit Kulkarni wrote:
>>     
>>>> You stated above that you were using 1.2.4, but now you are saying you
>>>> are using 1.2.6. Please be sure to provide accurate information.
>>>>         
>>> I am sorry for the above information.Yes earlier the version was 1.2.4
>>> but i installed rspec again and it installed the latest version i.e
>>> 1.2.6
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Do you have both rspec and rspec-rails? And are they both 1.2.6 now?
>>>> Yes i have both rspec and rspec-rails as 1.2.6 and 1.2.4 installed.
>>>>         
>>>> FYI - I get the same result from 1.2.6. All specs pass.
>>>>         
>> Any Updates....
>> :-)
>>     
>
> Any Vista users in earshot? I've done all I can do on this.

Hi David

I'm on Vista, but I just joined the mailing list - could I have a bit of 
a background to what we're trying to do?  I'll try to see what I can do.

Cheers,
Mohit.
6/9/2009 | 11:30 PM.


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun  9 13:31:40 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 12:31:40 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <4A2E8015.2060005@onghu.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
	<f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>
	<ed798b6ad6cfbea7d1904c38441d5f65@ruby-forum.com>
	<a139f832ac7863b0151267f3aba1b309@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906090458w1276878jd84d3cc52554b671@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A2E8015.2060005@onghu.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906091031w30285803ocb6e527b802ec7c0@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Mohit Sindhwani<tech at onghu.com> wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 1:19 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Amit Kulkarni wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You stated above that you were using 1.2.4, but now you are saying you
>>>>> are using 1.2.6. Please be sure to provide accurate information.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am sorry for the above information.Yes earlier the version was 1.2.4
>>>> but i installed rspec again and it installed the latest version i.e
>>>> 1.2.6
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have both rspec and rspec-rails? And are they both 1.2.6 now?
>>>>> Yes i have both rspec and rspec-rails as 1.2.6 and 1.2.4 installed.
>>>>> ? ? ? ?FYI - I get the same result from 1.2.6. All specs pass.
>>>>>
>>>
>>> Any Updates....
>>> :-)
>>>
>>
>> Any Vista users in earshot? I've done all I can do on this.
>
> Hi David
>
> I'm on Vista, but I just joined the mailing list - could I have a bit of a
> background to what we're trying to do? ?I'll try to see what I can do.

Thanks for volunteering to help Amit. You can see the full thread at
http://groups.google.com/group/rspec/browse_thread/thread/dc0f97750a92f7bd.

Cheers,
David

>
> Cheers,
> Mohit.
> 6/9/2009 | 11:30 PM.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From hvolkmer at gmail.com  Tue Jun  9 16:25:30 2009
From: hvolkmer at gmail.com (Hendrik Volkmer)
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 22:25:30 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Adding specs to engines
In-Reply-To: <97f5463f-c7fc-4f7d-af64-54dfc2b118f5@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
References: <97f5463f-c7fc-4f7d-af64-54dfc2b118f5@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <c601c8eb0906091325h3d419ed1o46a6a733dfab3718@mail.gmail.com>

Hi!

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:33 AM, ru_ghetto<ru_ghetto at rubyghetto.com> wrote:
> I am breaking an app into a bunch of rails 2.x style engine plugins.
> The app is already tested with rspec and I am trying to figure out how
> to get autotest or even rake spec to run the examples in the plugins.

We use our dry_plugin_test_helper [1] to test our engines. The TODOs
at the bottom of the README are solved. So it should work with RSpec.

You should use PluginTestEnvironment.initialize_engines_environment
instead of PluginTestEnvironment.initialize_environment for engines
tests/specs.

Cheers,
Hendrik

http://github.com/imedo/dry_plugin_test_helper/tree/master

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun  9 23:27:18 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Alexandre Da silva)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:27:18 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 4:50 PM, Arco <akleak at gmail.com> wrote:
>> github.com/grosser/autotest/tree/master).
>>
>> Is there a way to make autospec run just once if it sees a red
>> example?
>>
>> I am using rspec 1.2.2, platform: cygwin - testing a standalone ruby
>> class.
> 
> What's in your spec/spec.opts file?

I get the same behavior....
my spec/spec.opts contains:
--colour
--format progress
--loadby mtime
--reverse


I can reproduce in a new project...

rails blog
cd blog/
script/generate rspec
script/generate rspec_scaffold posts title:string body:text
rm -rf test/
rake db:create:all
rake db:migrate
rake db:test:prepare
autospec

# posts generated in plural to get error at beginning

the loop runs forever

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun  9 23:28:40 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Alexandre Da silva)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:28:40 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>

sorry my self reply... but I forgot to mention that I am running Ubuntu
8.10 ruby 1.8.7.xx
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Wed Jun 10 06:55:48 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:55:48 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
Message-ID: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>

Hello,

      I had seen many controller spec using mock and stub objects.

      I had written controller spec earlier without these objects.

      In the book it is mention about mock and stub objects.but i am
still not getting the reason behind it.

      Can somebody tell me what are these and why are we using it
especially in controllers?
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Jun 10 13:56:35 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:56:35 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> ? ? ?I had seen many controller spec using mock and stub objects.
>
> ? ? ?I had written controller spec earlier without these objects.
>
> ? ? ?In the book it is mention about mock and stub objects.but i am
> still not getting the reason behind it.

Did you read the chapter on Mock Objects?

>
> ? ? ?Can somebody tell me what are these and why are we using it
> especially in controllers?

From solaris at sundevil.de  Wed Jun 10 06:44:08 2009
From: solaris at sundevil.de (Hendrik Volkmer)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:44:08 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Adding specs to engines
In-Reply-To: <97f5463f-c7fc-4f7d-af64-54dfc2b118f5@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
References: <97f5463f-c7fc-4f7d-af64-54dfc2b118f5@c9g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <c601c8eb0906100344h24502bb4na210dcb682ca162@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:33 AM, ru_ghetto<ru_ghetto at rubyghetto.com> wrote:
> I am breaking an app into a bunch of rails 2.x style engine plugins.
> The app is already tested with rspec and I am trying to figure out how
> to get autotest or even rake spec to run the examples in the plugins.
We use our dry_plugin_test_helper [1] to test our engines. The TODOs
at the bottom of the README are solved. So it should work with RSpec.

You should use PluginTestEnvironment.initialize_engines_environment
instead of PluginTestEnvironment.initialize_environment for engines
tests/specs.

Cheers,
Hendrik

http://github.com/imedo/dry_plugin_test_helper/tree/master

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Wed Jun 10 02:48:53 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 08:48:53 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Troble running controller spec
In-Reply-To: <4A2E8015.2060005@onghu.com>
References: <aa7791b5ce5258a2e64918dfa852a8ad@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0905220335s3c7a9657xf6562acd8a4b7998@mail.gmail.com>
	<4d688e753514dc23e3838da815505f79@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080703r65abe625p1634fee81ca2f7dc@mail.gmail.com>
	<f5ec4a8a1c694c06e0b60ed5cd8ff062@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906080801p38f67629s7c2babd25c79eb07@mail.gmail.com>
	<ed798b6ad6cfbea7d1904c38441d5f65@ruby-forum.com>
	<a139f832ac7863b0151267f3aba1b309@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906090458w1276878jd84d3cc52554b671@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A2E8015.2060005@onghu.com>
Message-ID: <54a5ec34cddbd3084bf54a777db60a63@ruby-forum.com>

Mohit Sindhwani wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>>>>
>> Any Vista users in earshot? I've done all I can do on this.
> Hi David
> 
> I'm on Vista, but I just joined the mailing list - could I have a bit of
> a background to what we're trying to do?  I'll try to see what I can do.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mohit.
> 6/9/2009 | 11:30 PM.

Thanks Mohit.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From sfeley at gmail.com  Wed Jun 10 14:39:46 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:39:46 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906101139h7e6e6a9t3265372cdb49ed2f@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:55 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>
> ? ? ?In the book it is mention about mock and stub objects.but i am
> still not getting the reason behind it.

The Very Short Answer: You don't want your controller specs failing
because your model is broken.  Your _model_ specs should fail instead.
 You also don't want your controller specs running slow because it's
hitting a database.  (That, again, is the model's problem.)

The answer to this is not to talk to the model in your controller
specs.  Your specs talk only to the controller.  For everything else,
you create one or more fake model-like thingies that give all the
right answers when asked the right questions.

Then, when your controller specs fail, you know where to focus your
energy.  In the controller.

(That, or they fail because the specs or the mocks and stubs are
slightly wrong.  In my experience that's more common, and that's one
reason why I hardly ever do controller specs any more.  But still:
there you go.  That's the reason for the way it's done canonically.)



-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Wed Jun 10 22:50:09 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Zach Powell)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 04:50:09 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] spec_server errors when reloading fixture
	replacement pl
In-Reply-To: <fafd7a4a2d9ab51f0b3d480b0616f376@ruby-forum.com>
References: <1106da77-505a-4262-b9df-a67c9af6027b@w35g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
	<49CF1F6E.7080905@railsnewbie.com>
	<7a9e7cb7-5bc3-499e-9986-36cb6e4a8e69@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
	<49CF3411.9040409@railsnewbie.com>
	<4eab1d15-ce00-4992-a81a-9fdcc9d02eb0@z16g2000prd.googlegroups.com>
	<ea11042e-f460-45bf-81b8-6af226a894eb@s12g2000prc.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0905010704r254bab7bn5ac3d32b8027672f@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA41629A-D345-43AA-8EB2-FD54955F5892@avit.ca>
	<fafd7a4a2d9ab51f0b3d480b0616f376@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <47e6f1f1659e51b5ab0e3c1600e58d21@ruby-forum.com>

Ben Johnson wrote:
> Did anyone ever figure out the factory_girl / machinist issues? I am 
> having the same problems and can figure out how to fix it for the life 
> of me. The first run works fine, then afterwards I get a bunch of these 
> errors:
> 
> No blueprint for class Venue
> 
> Any ideas? Thanks!


I found that using

load File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/blueprints.rb")

in the spec_helper.rb

did the trick.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Thu Jun 11 03:17:38 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:17:38 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> 
> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> ? ? ?I had seen many controller spec using mock and stub objects.
>>
>> ? ? ?I had written controller spec earlier without these objects.
>>
>> ? ? ?In the book it is mention about mock and stub objects.but i am
>> still not getting the reason behind it.
> 
> Did you read the chapter on Mock Objects?

Yes i have read Mock Objects.
I understood a bit that Mock object create objects virtually so that we 
can run our specs.It helps us in that we dont have to actually create 
those objects.

But i am still not getting my hand on it.

we may have a situation that just for instance that all the development 
is done and we are now writing the spec for it.In this case all the 
coding in controller,model are done.
So when we write specs for controller do we have to create mock objects?
What if we write specs in controller without using mock objects?Will it 
be fine?

Also since i am using the beta version Mocking Objects part is not 
there.And it is does not give clearcut idea from the topic Mock Objects.
Also it will be very helpful if you can provide me a link or anything 
which can give me details of Mocks and Stubs.How to use it?When to use 
it..e.t.c

Thanks & Regards,

Amit
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From matt at mattwynne.net  Thu Jun 11 04:43:48 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:43:48 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
	<29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>


On 11 Jun 2009, at 08:17, Amit Kulkarni wrote:

> David Chelimsky wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> ? ? ?I had seen many controller spec using mock and stub  
>>> objects.
>>>
>>> ? ? ?I had written controller spec earlier without these  
>>> objects.
>>>
>>> ? ? ?In the book it is mention about mock and stub  
>>> objects.but i am
>>> still not getting the reason behind it.
>>
>> Did you read the chapter on Mock Objects?
>
> Yes i have read Mock Objects.
> I understood a bit that Mock object create objects virtually so that  
> we
> can run our specs.It helps us in that we dont have to actually create
> those objects.
>
> But i am still not getting my hand on it.
>
> we may have a situation that just for instance that all the  
> development
> is done and we are now writing the spec for it.In this case all the
> coding in controller,model are done.
> So when we write specs for controller do we have to create mock  
> objects?
> What if we write specs in controller without using mock objects?Will  
> it
> be fine?

If you're writing the specs after you've written the code, you're  
losing a lot of the value of mock objects.

Mock objects were originally devised as a design tool for use when  
doing TDD. TDD stands for Test *Driven* Development, meaning that you  
write the test before you have written any of the code. When you're  
doing this, you want to be able to build the system piece by piece,  
class by class, so you write tests for a single object at a time, and  
use mock objects to assemble quick, lightweight sketches of the  
surrounding objects that you imagine it will interact with when the  
system is finished.

> Also since i am using the beta version Mocking Objects part is not
> there.And it is does not give clearcut idea from the topic Mock  
> Objects.
> Also it will be very helpful if you can provide me a link or anything
> which can give me details of Mocks and Stubs.How to use it?When to use
> it..e.t.c

This is a big topic which is not going to be easy to explain over  
email. Here is some more stuff for you to read.

http://www.patmaddox.com/blog/you-probably-dont-get-mocks
http://www.mockobjects.com/book/
http://www.jmock.org/oopsla2004.pdf
http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html


Matt Wynne
http://beta.songkick.com
http://blog.mattwynne.net




From lists at ruby-forum.com  Thu Jun 11 05:39:28 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:39:28 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
	<29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
	<46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <4f319adc94f989870fe60f6a7e59bf05@ruby-forum.com>

Matt Wynne wrote:
> On 11 Jun 2009, at 08:17, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
> 
>>>>
>> those objects.
>> it
>> be fine?
> 
> If you're writing the specs after you've written the code, you're
> losing a lot of the value of mock objects.

Actually i am writing specs before the code is written.I saw many 
examples especially in controllers they are using mocks.So i was bit 
confused regarding the same.

Also Imagine the same situation where code is written and we are writing 
specs for that then is it necessary to use mocks?If Yes why since code 
is already written?

> Mock objects were originally devised as a design tool for use when
> doing TDD. TDD stands for Test *Driven* Development, meaning that you
> write the test before you have written any of the code. When you're
> doing this, you want to be able to build the system piece by piece,
> class by class, so you write tests for a single object at a time, and
> use mock objects to assemble quick, lightweight sketches of the
> surrounding objects that you imagine it will interact with when the
> system is finished.
> 
>> Also since i am using the beta version Mocking Objects part is not
>> there.And it is does not give clearcut idea from the topic Mock  
>> Objects.
>> Also it will be very helpful if you can provide me a link or anything
>> which can give me details of Mocks and Stubs.How to use it?When to use
>> it..e.t.c
> 
> This is a big topic which is not going to be easy to explain over
> email. Here is some more stuff for you to read.
> 
> http://www.patmaddox.com/blog/you-probably-dont-get-mocks
> http://www.mockobjects.com/book/
> http://www.jmock.org/oopsla2004.pdf
> http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html

Thanks a lot Matt for the above links.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 09:36:28 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:36:28 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <4f319adc94f989870fe60f6a7e59bf05@ruby-forum.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
	<29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
	<46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>
	<4f319adc94f989870fe60f6a7e59bf05@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906110636vd0e75a6oc43642dbb31e9040@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 4:39 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Matt Wynne wrote:
>> On 11 Jun 2009, at 08:17, Amit Kulkarni wrote:
>>
>>>>>
>>> those objects.
>>> it
>>> be fine?
>>
>> If you're writing the specs after you've written the code, you're
>> losing a lot of the value of mock objects.
>
> Actually i am writing specs before the code is written.I saw many
> examples especially in controllers they are using mocks.So i was bit
> confused regarding the same.
>
> Also Imagine the same situation where code is written and we are writing
> specs for that then is it necessary to use mocks?If Yes why since code
> is already written?

It's not a matter of necessity, but rather a matter of costs and
benefits. This is a very complex and subtle topic, which is one reason
a lot of people who avoid mocking do so. At some level, it is simpler
to not use any mocks or stubs anywhere. But if you choose that path,
there are a lot of benefits you're missing out on.

Steve wrote in his reply earlier in this thread that we don't want out
controller specs failing because the model is broken. But it's not
just when the model breaks. It's when the model *changes*.

Say, for example, that we've got a Widget model that has a required
name attribute, and an optional date attribute. We've got this in our
controller spec:

describe WidgetsController do
  describe "POST create" do
    context "with valid attributes" do
      it "redirects to the widget list" do
        post :create, :widget => {:name => 'Foo'}
        response.should redirect_to(widgets_path)
      end
    end
    context "with invalid attributes" do
      it "re-renders the 'new' template" do
        post :create, :widget => {} #missing the required name
        response.should render_template('new')
      end
    end
  end
end

Now imagine that we're working on the model spec and we get a new
requirement that the date is required. So we write a spec:

describe Widget do
  it "requires a date attribute" do
    Widget.new(:name => 'Foo', :date => nil).should_not be_valid
  end
end

That fails, so we add "validates_presence_of :date" to the model and
then the spec passes. Success! Except now the valid attributes case in
the controller spec fails because we've changed the meaning of valid
for this model. So you have to go back and change this and every other
example that creates a Widget without a date.

Now stubs/mocks are certainly not the only way to fix this problem.
You can use fixtures, centralized helper methods, object mothers, and
test data builders. These are all tools that help you centralize the
creation of objects, so when you do run into this sort of problem, you
only need to fix it in one place. But you still need to fix it once,
which takes your focus away from the task at hand. And you don't get
the speed savings you get w/ stubs/mocks. And you still get controller
specs failing when models are broken.

For the record, I generally use stubs/mocks in controller specs, but I
tend towards test data builders in model specs. But I'm also very
comfortable with all of these tools and am perfectly willing to use
test data builders in controller specs or mocks/stubs in model specs
when that is the better choice for a given situation. Really, I think
that's what we should all be striving for. Not so much "should I use
mocks or not," but "when should I choose to use them?"

HTH,
David

>> Mock objects were originally devised as a design tool for use when
>> doing TDD. TDD stands for Test *Driven* Development, meaning that you
>> write the test before you have written any of the code. When you're
>> doing this, you want to be able to build the system piece by piece,
>> class by class, so you write tests for a single object at a time, and
>> use mock objects to assemble quick, lightweight sketches of the
>> surrounding objects that you imagine it will interact with when the
>> system is finished.
>>
>>> Also since i am using the beta version Mocking Objects part is not
>>> there.And it is does not give clearcut idea from the topic Mock
>>> Objects.
>>> Also it will be very helpful if you can provide me a link or anything
>>> which can give me details of Mocks and Stubs.How to use it?When to use
>>> it..e.t.c
>>
>> This is a big topic which is not going to be easy to explain over
>> email. Here is some more stuff for you to read.
>>
>> http://www.patmaddox.com/blog/you-probably-dont-get-mocks
>> http://www.mockobjects.com/book/
>> http://www.jmock.org/oopsla2004.pdf
>> http://www.martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html
>
> Thanks a lot Matt for the above links.
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From jpm.van.dijk at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 05:49:36 2009
From: jpm.van.dijk at gmail.com (John van Dijk)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 02:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Textmate Bundle focussed test
Message-ID: <a074e7a6-dc31-4866-b1e9-7380562a0502@r37g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>

When running a focussed (single) example in textmate and have no
description like this:

it { should do_something }

I get not the desired effect :)

Is there a way to get this to work?
(When running all examples this is no problem and works fine)

regards, j.


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 10:02:07 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:02:07 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Textmate Bundle focussed test
In-Reply-To: <a074e7a6-dc31-4866-b1e9-7380562a0502@r37g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
References: <a074e7a6-dc31-4866-b1e9-7380562a0502@r37g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906110702h7edc1f50vc337c8cb9bf65268@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 4:49 AM, John van Dijk<jpm.van.dijk at gmail.com> wrote:
> When running a focussed (single) example in textmate and have no
> description like this:
>
> it { should do_something }
>
> I get not the desired effect :)
>
> Is there a way to get this to work?

The mechanism for running focused examples relies on the name of the
example. When you use this format, the name is not known until after
the example is run. So, at least for the moment, no.

David


> (When running all examples this is no problem and works fine)
>
> regards, j.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From sfeley at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 12:36:49 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:36:49 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906110636vd0e75a6oc43642dbb31e9040@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
	<29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
	<46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>
	<4f319adc94f989870fe60f6a7e59bf05@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906110636vd0e75a6oc43642dbb31e9040@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906110936k311b882evd6a083bddb4b3822@mail.gmail.com>

(NOTE: This reply is no longer really for Amit's benefit any more.
What David said made perfect sense as an answer to the original
question.  Now I'm just spinning off into theory.)

((But David -- if the repetition of this whole argument

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:36 AM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Steve wrote in his reply earlier in this thread that we don't want out
> controller specs failing because the model is broken. But it's not
> just when the model breaks. It's when the model *changes*.

True.  Though if I wanted to play Devil's Advocate, I could make a
case that from the point of view of the controller, it's the same
thing.  "What?  The Widget wants WHAT now?  Hey, I know all about
widgets, and this widget's not doing what I expect any more.  Must be
something wrong with it."

(Of course, that exact attitude points to a lot of what's wrong in
human relationships, not just OO ones.  >8->  So I wouldn't defend
that case rigorously.  Still -- it's a problem that can be exacerbated
by the sort of static expectation mocks play into.)


> That fails, so we add "validates_presence_of :date" to the model and
> then the spec passes. Success! Except now the valid attributes case in
> the controller spec fails because we've changed the meaning of valid
> for this model. So you have to go back and change this and every other
> example that creates a Widget without a date.

Yep.  But isn't the difference just a matter of timing?  If you just
added a new requirement to Widgets, the controller *needs* to change
before you hit production or it's going to break in real-world use.
You'll eventually have to go back and change every mock, and _then_
change every example anyway.  If you don't, then the mocks no longer
represent the true expectation of a Widget and your controller's
behavior is no longer correct from the widget's POV.  You end up with
specs that pass when the application wouldn't.

As a matter of practicality, I think I would *prefer* the controller
spec to fail right away so that I don't forget to update my mocks
later on.  Yes, I *should* have integration tests that would catch
this, so I ought to be safe if I'm doing other things right; but if
the controller spec will have to change sooner or later, I'd rather it
bugged me to change it sooner.

As I see it, the cost of violating DRY and repeating the expectations
of a Widget in a number of mocks, which then have to be maintained
separately, is *usually* higher than the cost of referring to the
actual model, with slower test runs and less specific failure
pinpointing.  I don't see earlier spec repair as a cost at all, given
that those specs will have to change anyway.  There may be cases where
this would pay off to me, but the typical highly coupled Rails
model/controller relationship isn't it.  In practice I only use mocks
these days to take the place of outside interfaces or bigger, more
conceptually distinct subapplications.


> [ . . . ]   Really, I think
> that's what we should all be striving for. Not so much "should I use
> mocks or not," but "when should I choose to use them?"

And here...  Here you made me really pause and think.

Enough to make it a separate message.



-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Thu Jun 11 12:50:53 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:50:53 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Fixtures are not loaded while running controller spec
Message-ID: <2441782714143923ffbad86f88b18ddd@ruby-forum.com>

Hi,

   I am running controller spec and it gives me result as 0 examples, 0
failures.

   I checked into the database and i saw that fixtures are not loaded.

   Following are the details of my controller file.


   require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper')
def valid_bb_post_attributes
  {
    :body => "test description",
    :title => "test"
  }
end
describe BbPostsController do
  context "test" do
    fixtures :bb_posts, :users
    @user = User.find_by_login("amit")
    if @user
      it "should create post" do
        post = create_post
        post.should be_valid
      end
    end
  end

My bb_posts.ml file contains

bb_post1:
  id: 1
  body: body_description
  title: test

bb_post2:
  id: 2
  body: aasasaskajs
  title: wwwww

Similarly my users.yml contains

amit:
  id: 6
  login: amit
  email: amit at test.com

kiran:
  id : 7
  login: kiran
  email: kiran at test.com


I dont know what is wrong.
Please suggest :-)
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 12:56:48 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:56:48 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906110936k311b882evd6a083bddb4b3822@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
	<29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
	<46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>
	<4f319adc94f989870fe60f6a7e59bf05@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906110636vd0e75a6oc43642dbb31e9040@mail.gmail.com>
	<1fb4df0906110936k311b882evd6a083bddb4b3822@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906110956m779b55b1m5827cffa53ce7a97@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Stephen Eley<sfeley at gmail.com> wrote:
> (NOTE: This reply is no longer really for Amit's benefit any more.
> What David said made perfect sense as an answer to the original
> question. ?Now I'm just spinning off into theory.)
>
> ((But David -- if the repetition of this whole argument
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:36 AM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Steve wrote in his reply earlier in this thread that we don't want out
>> controller specs failing because the model is broken. But it's not
>> just when the model breaks. It's when the model *changes*.
>
> True. ?Though if I wanted to play Devil's Advocate, I could make a
> case that from the point of view of the controller, it's the same
> thing. ?"What? ?The Widget wants WHAT now? ?Hey, I know all about
> widgets, and this widget's not doing what I expect any more. ?Must be
> something wrong with it."
>
> (Of course, that exact attitude points to a lot of what's wrong in
> human relationships, not just OO ones. ?>8-> ?So I wouldn't defend
> that case rigorously. ?Still -- it's a problem that can be exacerbated
> by the sort of static expectation mocks play into.)
>
>
>> That fails, so we add "validates_presence_of :date" to the model and
>> then the spec passes. Success! Except now the valid attributes case in
>> the controller spec fails because we've changed the meaning of valid
>> for this model. So you have to go back and change this and every other
>> example that creates a Widget without a date.
>
> Yep. ?But isn't the difference just a matter of timing? ?If you just
> added a new requirement to Widgets, the controller *needs* to change
> before you hit production or it's going to break in real-world use.

This may be true in some cases, but generally with validations the
controller passes the params straight through to the model without
caring about them in any way. In those cases, where the controller is
only interacting with methods that are part of AR::Base, you're not
really risking a validation change effecting the controller's
behaviour.

> You'll eventually have to go back and change every mock, and _then_
> change every example anyway. ?If you don't, then the mocks no longer
> represent the true expectation of a Widget and your controller's
> behavior is no longer correct from the widget's POV. ?You end up with
> specs that pass when the application wouldn't.

I think you're generalizing here, which is what I was driving at with
my point about knowing when to use stubs/mocks and when not to. As I
mentioned above, these changes need not always propagate up to the
controller or its specs. I would agree with you that there is
additional risk in cases where the changes to the model actually do
require changes to the controller. Though I mitigate that risk by
working with Cucumber first, which catches those sorts of
mis-alignments a bit later than if I wasn't using stubs/mocks, but
certainly before those changes make it to production.

At the moment, one of my projects does not use Cucumber. We're using
RSpec for both higher level and lower level specs. In this case, the
level of use of stubs/mocks is far lower than in other projects I've
worked on.

> As a matter of practicality, I think I would *prefer* the controller
> spec to fail right away so that I don't forget to update my mocks
> later on. ?Yes, I *should* have integration tests that would catch
> this, so I ought to be safe if I'm doing other things right; but if
> the controller spec will have to change sooner or later, I'd rather it
> bugged me to change it sooner.

I can appreciate that, though it's not how I operate.

> As I see it, the cost of violating DRY and repeating the expectations
> of a Widget in a number of mocks, which then have to be maintained
> separately, is *usually* higher than the cost of referring to the
> actual model, with slower test runs and less specific failure
> pinpointing.

I run the specs after every change (using autospec). For this to work
effectively, the specs need to run fast. This is one of the benefits,
in my view, of having two separate tools for dealing at different
views of the code (i.e. RSpec and Cucumber).

> ?I don't see earlier spec repair as a cost at all, given
> that those specs will have to change anyway. ?There may be cases where
> this would pay off to me, but the typical highly coupled Rails
> model/controller relationship isn't it. ?In practice I only use mocks
> these days to take the place of outside interfaces or bigger, more
> conceptually distinct subapplications.
>
>
>> [ . . . ] ? Really, I think
>> that's what we should all be striving for. Not so much "should I use
>> mocks or not," but "when should I choose to use them?"
>
> And here... ?Here you made me really pause and think.
>
> Enough to make it a separate message.

Looking forward to it.

Cheers,
David

>
>
>
> --
> Have Fun,
> ? Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
> ? ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
> ? http://www.escapepod.org
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 12:58:51 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:58:51 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Fixtures are not loaded while running controller
	spec
In-Reply-To: <2441782714143923ffbad86f88b18ddd@ruby-forum.com>
References: <2441782714143923ffbad86f88b18ddd@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906110958h353c878v64cc1a7629af6f51@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> ? I am running controller spec and it gives me result as 0 examples, 0
> failures.
>
> ? I checked into the database and i saw that fixtures are not loaded.
>
> ? Following are the details of my controller file.
>
>
> ? require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper')
> def valid_bb_post_attributes
> ?{
> ? ?:body => "test description",
> ? ?:title => "test"
> ?}
> end
> describe BbPostsController do
> ?context "test" do
> ? ?fixtures :bb_posts, :users
> ? ?@user = User.find_by_login("amit")
> ? ?if @user
> ? ? ?it "should create post" do
> ? ? ? ?post = create_post
> ? ? ? ?post.should be_valid
> ? ? ?end
> ? ?end
> ?end
>
> My bb_posts.ml file contains
>
> bb_post1:
> ?id: 1
> ?body: body_description
> ?title: test
>
> bb_post2:
> ?id: 2
> ?body: aasasaskajs
> ?title: wwwww
>
> Similarly my users.yml contains
>
> amit:
> ?id: 6
> ?login: amit
> ?email: amit at test.com
>
> kiran:
> ?id : 7
> ?login: kiran
> ?email: kiran at test.com
>
>
> I dont know what is wrong.
> Please suggest :-)

Make sure that the fixtures are in the same place that is declared in
spec/spec_helper.rb.

From sfeley at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 14:48:30 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:48:30 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com>

So...  In the recent five-hundred-and-forty-seventh iteration of the
"What's the point of mocks?" discussion on this list, David Chelimsky
ended a message with:

> [ . . . ]   Really, I think
> that's what we should all be striving for. Not so much "should I use
> mocks or not," but "when should I choose to use them?"

And here...  Here you made me really pause and think.

David: Now that you're a Pragmatic author -- have you read Andy's
_Pragmatic Thinking and Learning?_  Damn good book.  The most valuable
part of it to me was in the first couple of chapters, which laid out
the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition.  Having learned about it a few
months ago, I'm starting to see it everywhere now.  I don't intend to
rehash the whole theory, but it basically says that the development of
a skill (_any_ skill) follows a predictable pattern:

1. Novice (needs clear checklists or recipes; not ready for theory or
problem-solving)
2. Advanced Beginner (can solve typical problems and alter the recipe
within parameters)
3. Competent (understands the theory behind the recipes and can act creatively)
4. Proficient (acts on principles rather than recipes; using the skill
is nearly automatic)
5. Expert (defines and innovates the field; works on intuition rather
than rules)

>From reading a fair amount on TDD/BDD -- including the Rspec Book -- I
think there's widespread consensus that learning TDD/BDD is a totally
separate skill from programming itself.  One can be an expert
programmer with decades of experience, but still be at zero when it
comes to writing and using tests.  (Or even an "anti-learner," hostile
to the concept itself.)

My thesis in this message is that there is a hurdle built into
learning the skill of TDD/BDD with RSpec: that there's a steep curve
somewhere in the early part of stage 2 -- "Advanced Beginner" -- that
makes it more difficult than it ought to be to ascend to competence.
The hurdle is that some easy things are easy, but other easy things
are very complicated.  Not just hard to do, but hard to *learn.*  Hard
to understand why stuff works.

The tasks where the curve begins can be identified by following the
high-level trends of conversations on this list.  Usually it's on
Rails.  Models are easy enough; heck, models are fun.  But then we try
to do controllers, and...  *Boom.*  Brick wall.  You can run the
generator, but...  What is it doing?  How do you change it?  Let's say
I'm a novice to Rails, too: what the hell *is* that routing spec?

That last sentence is the sharpest way I can think to phrase the
problem.  "What the hell *is* that spec?"  Rails is easy to start
rolling with for the default use cases, but moderately hard to
_understand_ when you're ready to do more complex things.  Its nuances
are scattered in a lot of places, and some of the connections are
invisible.  RSpec on Rails, even in the default cases, exposes more of
those nuances and *requires* you to understand them.  ActiveRecord
stands on its own, so models are fine (and views are mostly just
tedious) but you can't even begin to understand that generated
controller spec until you understand Rails and all of its nuances
better.

And if you're trying to learn both at once?  And you don't want to go
deeper into your Rails code until your specs pass?  ...Learning
deadlock.  The failure to understand one keeps you from making
progress with the other.  In the ideal case the specs would help to
teach you Rails, but in practice it doesn't work that way.  They specs
are too opaque without Rails knowledge.

When I set out to consciously learn this stuff, I was determined to
really learn it.  I didn't want to type any code I couldn't
understand.  So I ran the RSpec scaffold in a 'dummy' app and used it
only as a reference to build my own by hand.  The first controller
spec I tried was for a nested resource with parent and child objects.
(Bad choice perhaps.)  It took me almost two days to write that first
full spec with all the mocks and stubs, and get it to pass on every
action.  I was on contract and even to me that felt hard to justify.
And then I had to deal with authentication and filters, and then I
felt the pain *again.*

I'm a stubborn ass, so I plodded through.  Eventually I even figured
out what I was doing.  (I think.)  But I believe I have seen people
run into this curve and view it as a brick wall.  Many give up,
sometimes concluding that RSpec is beyond them -- after all, everyone
says it's "easy," so if they can't write a controller spec quickly or
see the immediate value of this stuff, they must be too dumb for it.

It isn't just Rails either.  That's the most common entry point, and
controllers seem to be the most common wall.  But I hit a wall again
when I needed to write an adapter for a complex SOAP interface,
building some abstractions on top of soap4r.  "Where do I start?" was
quite hard for me.  I fished around for blog posts and examples to
give me some precedent.  Eventually I figured out a reasonably
efficient way to mock out the SOAP responses without building a whole
fake server, and I think I'm better for the exercise.  But as soon as
I got beyond "this is all my code, so I understand it," I hit that
curve again.


...This is a real problem.  It's not entirely the fault of RSpec (in
which I include RSpec-Rails) as a framework.  Some of it's built into
the ideology: some types of systems really are hard to specify or
interact with, and we don't acknowledge that enough.  Or we say "If
it's painful to specify you're doing it wrong."  Not always true, and
a dangerous statement for a novice who's only feeling the sorts of
pain everyone feels when they first begin exercising.

Some of it's built into Rails and "Rails-like" MVC frameworks  This is
off the topic here, but I can't shake the feeling that if DHH had had
RSpec from the very start and applied some of its philosophies
faithfully, Rails would be different in some fundamental ways.
Instead, some things are coupled in ways that require RSpec-Rails to
jump through some weird hoops.  It all works, but it isn't all
_simple._  And beginners can't grok beyond simple.

Some of it's the fault of the community.  The problems I see here are
subtle and certainly not malignant.  This list, for instance, is
excellent for its purpose -- it has probably the highest
signal-to-noise ratio of any active technical list I follow, and
everyone's eager to help at every level.  I've never seen anyone
sniped at for asking beginner questions.  That's great.  But the
questions and the answers are both coming from such a broad range of
skill levels, and sometimes that makes for a disconnect that's tough
for learning.

That's what I saw in the quote above that triggered this weird polemic
from me.  In the Dreyfus model, there's no question that many people
here would be classed as Expert -- almost by definition in David's or
Aslak's case.  Me, I see myself on the level of "mid-to-high
Competent, struggling toward Proficient."  Whether that's accurate or
not, I'd be the wrong person to say.  Studies show that most
incompetent people are very bad at gauging their incompetence, and I
might be one of them.  Studies also show that Experts are generally
not good at teaching Novices, because they no longer _think_ in terms
of rules and recipes.  Making an Expert follow a recipe is terribly
frustrating and a waste of everyone's time.  OTOH telling Novice "use
your own judgment" is even more frustrating -- and may result in the
loss of that Novice.  The Novice doesn't _have_ his or her own
judgment yet.

When we say things like, "I think that's what we should be striving
for -- not 'should I use mocks or not,' but 'when should I choose to
use them?'"  ...That problem is, if we buy into that Dreyfus
hierarchy, that is a harmful statement to deliver to an audience
that's broadly distributed along the skill curve.  The question of
"When should I use X?" is an appropriate question for someone at
Competent or Proficient levels.  But it would be very challenging for
most Advanced Beginners to suggest an answer, and a Novice wouldn't be
able to answer it at all.  (As for Experts: they probably don't even
need to think about it.  They just know.)

We need more awareness of this.  It's not a bad thing, and I think
there are probably more benefits in having a skill-level-distributed
list like this than to set up some sort of "beginner's" or "learner's"
list or anything.  (For one thing, most programmers who'd benefit
would have too much ego to join it.)  We just need to recognize -- and
I include myself, as *I* spun off the theory tangent in that last
thread -- that a Novice question needs a Novice or Advanced Beginner
answer, and that saying "It's really more complicated than that" isn't
helpful to certain classes of question.


Community-wise: I also think we need better learning resources.  The
RSpec Book is great.  Followed faithfully, I have a hunch it can bring
an Advanced Beginner up to Competent with remarkable efficiency.  I
think it could work as well for *some* Novices.  But not all.  It
depends on their thinking patterns, and whether they need or want to
be grounded in theory before they get going with the recipes.  The
Mastermind puzzle is a good starting exercise, but there's too much
explanation going on before the rest of the practical reference
begins.  (Again, for some people.  This was _my_ impression.  For
others it might be just right.)

The RSpec.info site is...problematic.  It's quirky in its information
structure, and I've gotten lost sometimes clicking around to find
something I *knew* was there.  I don't feel comfortable pointing
people to it as a start-from-zero starting point.  The explanations
are clear and up-to-date, but it's hard to find a handhold.  The
Peepcode videos worked better for me, though they were a bit too long
for my ADD-driven brain.

At one point I was going to write a "Getting Started With RSpec" sort
of primer.  It was going to be informed by my own growth curve, and
truly start with "Step by step, okay, just do this."   No generators,
write the code by hand, but get actual specs working quickly in actual
projects.

Of course, my "do this" would be somewhat different from David's --
I've been vocal enough about doing a lot of my tests a different way
-- so I felt a bit awkward about breaking from orthodoxy when I don't
feel like an expert myself.  But I felt bold.  I started it, got a
little distracted and overplanned the demo app (a wiki to host the
primer itself, but I wanted some new sorts of features) and it's
languishing.  This thread makes me wonder if I should put a little
more foreground time into it.  Not the stupid wiki, but the document.


I'm rambling now, and I've spent *way* too much of my workday on this
message, so I'll just summarize:

* Some easy things are complicated in RSpec;
* Incomplete understanding of RSpec and a framework being spec'ed can
create learning deadlock;
* Novices need different answers than competent practitioners;
* The community as a whole should be aware and respectful of the
growth curve difficulty.

If anyone had the patience to read this far, any thoughts?  Am I
identifying real issues, or am I just full of hot air?


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From sfeley at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 15:00:05 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 15:00:05 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906110956m779b55b1m5827cffa53ce7a97@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
	<29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
	<46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>
	<4f319adc94f989870fe60f6a7e59bf05@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906110636vd0e75a6oc43642dbb31e9040@mail.gmail.com>
	<1fb4df0906110936k311b882evd6a083bddb4b3822@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906110956m779b55b1m5827cffa53ce7a97@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906111200u544d1b77s2ee30dad2349792a@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:56 PM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This may be true in some cases, but generally with validations the
> controller passes the params straight through to the model without
> caring about them in any way. In those cases, where the controller is
> only interacting with methods that are part of AR::Base, you're not
> really risking a validation change effecting the controller's
> behaviour.

This is a good point.  I think I got a little too zoomed in on the
example.  (In which that wasn't entirely clear, as it did focus on
specific attributes being passed.)  I stand corrected, thank you.



> I run the specs after every change (using autospec). For this to work
> effectively, the specs need to run fast. This is one of the benefits,
> in my view, of having two separate tools for dealing at different
> views of the code (i.e. RSpec and Cucumber).

And it's why the active side project I really *am* spending time on
right now is a smarter, more human-efficient replacement for Autospec.
 >8->

But enough of that until I can actually show something for it.


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From rick.denatale at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 17:53:26 2009
From: rick.denatale at gmail.com (Rick DeNatale)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:53:26 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deb2337a0906111453u716d6f18y3208806c3421bf8c@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Stephen Eley<sfeley at gmail.com> wrote:
> So... ?In the recent five-hundred-and-forty-seventh iteration of the
> "What's the point of mocks?" discussion on this list, David Chelimsky
> ended a message with:
>
>> [ . . . ] ? Really, I think
>> that's what we should all be striving for. Not so much "should I use
>> mocks or not," but "when should I choose to use them?"
>
> And here... ?Here you made me really pause and think.
>
> David: Now that you're a Pragmatic author -- have you read Andy's
> _Pragmatic Thinking and Learning?_ ?Damn good book. ?The most valuable
> part of it to me was in the first couple of chapters, which laid out
> the Dreyfus model of skill acquisition. ?Having learned about it a few
> months ago, I'm starting to see it everywhere now. ?I don't intend to
> rehash the whole theory, but it basically says that the development of
> a skill (_any_ skill) follows a predictable pattern:
>
> 1. Novice (needs clear checklists or recipes; not ready for theory or
> problem-solving)
> 2. Advanced Beginner (can solve typical problems and alter the recipe
> within parameters)
> 3. Competent (understands the theory behind the recipes and can act creatively)
> 4. Proficient (acts on principles rather than recipes; using the skill
> is nearly automatic)
> 5. Expert (defines and innovates the field; works on intuition rather
> than rules)

And look at the chart in the section "Is a Ruby Code-base Hard to
Understand?" in the article which Martin Fowler just published today
http://martinfowler.com/articles/rubyAtThoughtWorks.html

It shows a curve of the usage of metaprogramming in Ruby as the
experience of the programmer progresses, along with annotations about
what the thoughts about the technique during the leaning progression.

The progression goes:

Attitude                Usage
Scary and bad       low
Scary and good     at the high end of the sensible range
Obvious and good high in the "over usage" range
Obvious and bad   at the high end of the sensible range

The real key to mastery is gaining experience by making mistakes and
learning not only techniques, but the trade-offs in when and when not
to use them.


-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From pat.maddox at gmail.com  Thu Jun 11 20:09:57 2009
From: pat.maddox at gmail.com (Pat Maddox)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:09:57 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Fixtures are not loaded while running controller
	spec
In-Reply-To: <2441782714143923ffbad86f88b18ddd@ruby-forum.com>
References: <2441782714143923ffbad86f88b18ddd@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <2c7e61990906111709v1fb63f59h87547a7934811ca2@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:50 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> describe BbPostsController do
> ?context "test" do
> ? ?fixtures :bb_posts, :users
> ? ?@user = User.find_by_login("amit")
> ? ?if @user
> ? ? ?it "should create post" do
> ? ? ? ?post = create_post
> ? ? ? ?post.should be_valid
> ? ? ?end
> ? ?end
> ?end

Why do you have that if there?  That's gotta be screwing you up.  So
the way Rails tests work, the fixtures don't get loaded until an
example is run.  In your code, you're trying to find a user that
probably doesn't exist due to there being no fixtures loaded yet.  So
why are you doing that find and subsequent if?  Try changing it to:

describe BbPostsController do
  context "test" do
    fixtures :bb_posts, :users
    it "should create post" do
      User.find_by_login("amit").should_not be_nil
      post = create_post
      post.should be_valid
    end
  end
end

(that's an odd spec but let's try to get your fixtures loading first :)

Pat

From powertoaster at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 11 23:36:28 2009
From: powertoaster at hotmail.com (powertoaster)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:36:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] I am having a problem testing a date in a rails view
Message-ID: <23992350.post@talk.nabble.com>


I see June 13, 2009 on my index page when running in development.

I get this
2.
<false> is not true.

require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../../spec_helper')

describe "/timesheets/index.html.erb" do
  include TimesheetsHelper

  before(:each) do
    assigns[:timesheets] = [
            stub_model(Timesheets,
                       :tsdate => Date.parse('2009-6-13'),
                       :off => false,
                       :vacation => 9.99,
                       :holiday => 9.99,
                       :closed => false,
                       :comment => "value for comment",
                       :admin_comment => "value for admin_comment",
                       :approved => false
            ),
            stub_model(Timesheets,
                       :tsdate => Date.parse('2009-6-13'),
                       :off => false,
                       :vacation => 9.99,
                       :holiday => 9.99,
                       :closed => false,
                       :comment => "value for comment",
                       :admin_comment => "value for admin_comment",
                       :approved => false
            )
    ]
  end

  it "renders a list of timesheets" do
    render
    response.should have_tag("tr>td", "2009-06-13".to_s, 2) <++++++++ This
where it fails +++++>
    response.should have_tag("tr>td", false.to_s, 2)
    response.should have_tag("tr>td", 9.99.to_s, 2)
    response.should have_tag("tr>td", 9.99.to_s, 2)
    response.should have_tag("tr>td", false.to_s, 2)
    response.should have_tag("tr>td", "value for comment".to_s, 2)
    response.should have_tag("tr>td", "value for admin_comment".to_s, 2)
    response.should have_tag("tr>td", false.to_s, 2)
  end
end

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/I-am-having-a-problem-testing-a-date-in-a-rails-view-tp23992350p23992350.html
Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 12 01:39:15 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:39:15 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] I am having a problem testing a date in a rails
	view
In-Reply-To: <23992350.post@talk.nabble.com>
References: <23992350.post@talk.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906112239h52d66873t71e1fc7a679f0d95@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 10:36 PM, powertoaster<powertoaster at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> I see June 13, 2009 on my index page when running in development.
>
> I get this
> 2.
> <false> is not true.

This is not an rspec failure message. What other gems do you have at play?

Also, what versions of rspec, rspec-rails, ruby, rails, OS, etc?

http://wiki.github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/get-in-touch

>
> require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../../spec_helper')
>
> describe "/timesheets/index.html.erb" do
> ?include TimesheetsHelper
>
> ?before(:each) do
> ? ?assigns[:timesheets] = [
> ? ? ? ? ? ?stub_model(Timesheets,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :tsdate => Date.parse('2009-6-13'),
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :off => false,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :vacation => 9.99,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :holiday => 9.99,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :closed => false,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :comment => "value for comment",
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :admin_comment => "value for admin_comment",
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :approved => false
> ? ? ? ? ? ?),
> ? ? ? ? ? ?stub_model(Timesheets,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :tsdate => Date.parse('2009-6-13'),
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :off => false,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :vacation => 9.99,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :holiday => 9.99,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :closed => false,
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :comment => "value for comment",
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :admin_comment => "value for admin_comment",
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :approved => false
> ? ? ? ? ? ?)
> ? ?]
> ?end
>
> ?it "renders a list of timesheets" do
> ? ?render
> ? ?response.should have_tag("tr>td", "2009-06-13".to_s, 2) <++++++++ This
> where it fails +++++>
> ? ?response.should have_tag("tr>td", false.to_s, 2)
> ? ?response.should have_tag("tr>td", 9.99.to_s, 2)
> ? ?response.should have_tag("tr>td", 9.99.to_s, 2)
> ? ?response.should have_tag("tr>td", false.to_s, 2)
> ? ?response.should have_tag("tr>td", "value for comment".to_s, 2)
> ? ?response.should have_tag("tr>td", "value for admin_comment".to_s, 2)
> ? ?response.should have_tag("tr>td", false.to_s, 2)
> ?end
> end
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/I-am-having-a-problem-testing-a-date-in-a-rails-view-tp23992350p23992350.html
> Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun 12 02:10:19 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:10:19 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Fixtures are not loaded while running controller
	spec
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906110958h353c878v64cc1a7629af6f51@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2441782714143923ffbad86f88b18ddd@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906110958h353c878v64cc1a7629af6f51@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f369086312247f7506e33a93da96db58@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> 
> wrote:
>> ? require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper')
>> ? ?if @user
>> ?id: 1
>> amit:
>> I dont know what is wrong.
>> Please suggest :-)
> 
> Make sure that the fixtures are in the same place that is declared in
> spec/spec_helper.rb.

My fixtures are under spec/fixtures directory.

Earlier it were working fine.But suddenly i dont know what went wrong.
Also i checked that if i comment fixtures line then the specs are 
running fine.

Again when i uncomment the fixtures line then it is not working and 
fixtures are not getting loaded.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun 12 02:33:58 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:33:58 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Fixtures are not loaded while running controller
	spec
In-Reply-To: <2c7e61990906111709v1fb63f59h87547a7934811ca2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2441782714143923ffbad86f88b18ddd@ruby-forum.com>
	<2c7e61990906111709v1fb63f59h87547a7934811ca2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <adcfab870bebc132d3d82e109b352a0d@ruby-forum.com>


> describe BbPostsController do
>   context "test" do
>     fixtures :bb_posts, :users
>     it "should create post" do
>       User.find_by_login("amit").should_not be_nil
>       post = create_post
>       post.should be_valid
>     end
>   end
> end
> 
> (that's an odd spec but let's try to get your fixtures loading first :)
> 
> Pat

Thanks a lot Pat.It worked.
And fixtures were also loaded successfully.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From Jarmo.P at gmail.com  Fri Jun 12 02:59:30 2009
From: Jarmo.P at gmail.com (Jarmo Pertman)
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:59:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com> 
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>

Do you have any files, which might be changed during your failing
tests? Some temporary files or whatsoever? If that's the case, then
autotest thinks that you have made some changes already and tries to
run again. Solution would be to put that file into ignore list for
autotest.

On Jun 10, 6:28?am, Alexandre Da silva <li... at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> sorry my self reply... but I forgot to mention that I am running Ubuntu
> 8.10 ruby 1.8.7.xx
> --
> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com  Fri Jun 12 03:34:41 2009
From: Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com (Lee)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:34:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Can I set params in before[:each] block?
Message-ID: <9f033689-6ec7-4529-b6b2-92f4e161dd87@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>

In my controller's create method, I have:

@sub_context = @context.create_sub_context(params[:context][:name])

If I do not specify params in the "post :create" call in my controller
spec then I get the following error for each example:

You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
You might have expected an instance of ActiveRecord::Base.
The error occurred while evaluating nil.[]

So I see that it is trying to access :name when :context is nil which
can be avoided if I ensure each post :create includes a params for
[:context][:name] e.g.

post :create, :context => {"name" => "Seniors"}

I am wondering if there is a way to avoid having to specify params in
each and every example by adding some code to a before[:each] block?
For example, the params are redundant in some examples e.g.

    it "should save the context" do
      @context.should_receive(:save)
      post :create, :context => {"name" => "Seniors"}
    end

Thanks.

From matt at mattwynne.net  Fri Jun 12 04:43:00 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:43:00 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Can I set params in before[:each] block?
In-Reply-To: <9f033689-6ec7-4529-b6b2-92f4e161dd87@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
References: <9f033689-6ec7-4529-b6b2-92f4e161dd87@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <7B6873B8-EDDA-4C8E-8744-78E36A760059@mattwynne.net>


On 12 Jun 2009, at 08:34, Lee wrote:

> In my controller's create method, I have:
>
> @sub_context = @context.create_sub_context(params[:context][:name])
>
> If I do not specify params in the "post :create" call in my controller
> spec then I get the following error for each example:
>
> You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
> You might have expected an instance of ActiveRecord::Base.
> The error occurred while evaluating nil.[]
>
> So I see that it is trying to access :name when :context is nil which
> can be avoided if I ensure each post :create includes a params for
> [:context][:name] e.g.
>
> post :create, :context => {"name" => "Seniors"}
>
> I am wondering if there is a way to avoid having to specify params in
> each and every example by adding some code to a before[:each] block?
> For example, the params are redundant in some examples e.g.
>
>    it "should save the context" do
>      @context.should_receive(:save)
>      post :create, :context => {"name" => "Seniors"}
>    end
>
> Thanks.

There are several ways of doing this. The pattern I tend to us is to  
create a method that does the post, and contains default parameters  
which you can override if you want to.

describe "when the context has a name"
   def do_post(params = {})
     post :create, (:context => {"name" => "Seniors"}).merge(params)
   end

   it "should save the context" do
     @context.should_receive(:save)
     do_post
   end
end

Make sense?


Matt Wynne
http://beta.songkick.com
http://blog.mattwynne.net




From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun 12 05:46:41 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Amit Kulkarni)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:46:41 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906111200u544d1b77s2ee30dad2349792a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
	<29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
	<46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>
	<4f319adc94f989870fe60f6a7e59bf05@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906110636vd0e75a6oc43642dbb31e9040@mail.gmail.com>
	<1fb4df0906110936k311b882evd6a083bddb4b3822@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906110956m779b55b1m5827cffa53ce7a97@mail.gmail.com>
	<1fb4df0906111200u544d1b77s2ee30dad2349792a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <573c067e105d12c6974eb5fc9fcfe203@ruby-forum.com>

Even if we are using mocks and if our models are changed then also we 
need to change our spec.
Same for if we don't use mocks.

So same question i am asking Are mocks really useful?
Also When to use if at all we want to use?
I searched on net regarding the same but till now no success :-)

Also i had started writing controller specs without using mocks just to 
see how it works?Will it be ok?
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun 12 06:35:01 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Ninad Pol)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:35:01 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem while generating rspec model in Rails Project
Message-ID: <6b6d18e516aac6bebcaa83dbf3222173@ruby-forum.com>


Hi,

I am new to testing and Rspec. I have one rails project created on my
machine.
In this project under \app\models i have a file called "client.rb" which
has been already created. Now i want to generate spec file for this
model for which i am using command:

ruby script/generate rspec_model Client

Now with this command along with spec file, a file called "client.rb"
will also be generated under \app\models. But in my case since the file
"client.rb" is already present,with above command i am getting following
message:

---------------------------------------------------
>ruby script/generate rspec_model Client

The name 'Client' is either already used in your application or reserved
by Ru
by on Rails.
Please choose an alternative and run this generator again.

Suggestions:

customer
node
guest

----------------------------------------------------
Platform and Version details:

Windows xp-professional
Ruby 1.8.6
Rails 2.3.2
Gem 1.3.1
----------------------------------------------------
I have also attached console snapshot for same.

I haven't found any help related to this.Ideally in such cases it should
ask for the message regarding "whether you want to overwrite file
client.rb ? "

So can anybody please help me out regarding this issue. whether this is
related to version problem or what else earliest?

Attachments:
http://www.ruby-forum.com/attachment/3812/rspec_model_generation.JPG

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun 12 07:42:16 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Alexandre Da Silva)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:42:16 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>

Jarmo Pertman wrote:
> Do you have any files, which might be changed during your failing
> tests? Some temporary files or whatsoever? If that's the case, then
> autotest thinks that you have made some changes already and tries to
> run again. Solution would be to put that file into ignore list for
> autotest.

No... all was working some days ago.
in fact the same issue occurs with a new fresh project. Here is my test

rails blogapp
cd blogapp
script/generate rspec
script/generate rspec_scaffold posts title:string body:text
rake db:migrate
autospec


This will cause error because posts is pluralized... so my autospec 
loops forever.
all my applications are issuing the same behavior.

I am with latest rspec and rspec-rails gems (1.2.6 I mean)
when I back to my computer, I will provide a list of all my installed 
gems.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From zuperinfinite at gmail.com  Fri Jun 12 09:59:03 2009
From: zuperinfinite at gmail.com (Bart Zonneveld)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 15:59:03 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <8D54256F-282C-440B-9767-E1BD11AAC0B6@gmail.com>


On 12 jun 2009, at 13:42, Alexandre Da Silva wrote:

> Jarmo Pertman wrote:
>> Do you have any files, which might be changed during your failing
>> tests? Some temporary files or whatsoever? If that's the case, then
>> autotest thinks that you have made some changes already and tries to
>> run again. Solution would be to put that file into ignore list for
>> autotest.
>
> No... all was working some days ago.

I have the same issue. Whether a red rspec or cucumber file, autotest  
goes beserk.
Using the latest and greatest gems, on a fresh rails app.

gr,
bartz

From mauricio.linhares at gmail.com  Fri Jun 12 10:02:44 2009
From: mauricio.linhares at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Maur=EDcio_Linhares?=)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:02:44 -0300
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <8D54256F-282C-440B-9767-E1BD11AAC0B6@gmail.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
	<8D54256F-282C-440B-9767-E1BD11AAC0B6@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <cb7586fa0906120702h52a0af71o8e910588988cef61@mail.gmail.com>

Same for me.

-
Maur?cio Linhares
http://codeshooter.wordpress.com/ | http://twitter.com/mauriciojr



On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Bart Zonneveld<zuperinfinite at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 12 jun 2009, at 13:42, Alexandre Da Silva wrote:
>
>> Jarmo Pertman wrote:
>>>
>>> Do you have any files, which might be changed during your failing
>>> tests? Some temporary files or whatsoever? If that's the case, then
>>> autotest thinks that you have made some changes already and tries to
>>> run again. Solution would be to put that file into ignore list for
>>> autotest.
>>
>> No... all was working some days ago.
>
> I have the same issue. Whether a red rspec or cucumber file, autotest goes
> beserk.
> Using the latest and greatest gems, on a fresh rails app.
>
> gr,
> bartz
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 12 10:13:06 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:13:06 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem while generating rspec model in Rails
	Project
In-Reply-To: <6b6d18e516aac6bebcaa83dbf3222173@ruby-forum.com>
References: <6b6d18e516aac6bebcaa83dbf3222173@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906120713s668371a5ta0fde3035282b4aa@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Ninad Pol<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am new to testing and Rspec. I have one rails project created on my
> machine.
> In this project under \app\models i have a file called "client.rb" which
> has been already created. Now i want to generate spec file for this
> model for which i am using command:
>
> ruby script/generate rspec_model Client
>
> Now with this command along with spec file, a file called "client.rb"
> will also be generated under \app\models. But in my case since the file
> "client.rb" is already present,with above command i am getting following
> message:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------
>>ruby script/generate rspec_model Client
>
> The name 'Client' is either already used in your application or reserved
> by Ru
> by on Rails.
> Please choose an alternative and run this generator again.
>
> Suggestions:
>
> customer
> node
> guest
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Platform and Version details:
>
> Windows xp-professional
> Ruby 1.8.6
> Rails 2.3.2
> Gem 1.3.1
> ----------------------------------------------------
> I have also attached console snapshot for same.
>
> I haven't found any help related to this.Ideally in such cases it should
> ask for the message regarding "whether you want to overwrite file
> client.rb ? "
>
> So can anybody please help me out regarding this issue. whether this is
> related to version problem or what else earliest?

I'm not sure where this message is coming from but it's not coming
from rspec. Have you tried generating with the rails generator?

ruby script/generate model Client

Does that give you the same error?

>
> Attachments:
> http://www.ruby-forum.com/attachment/3812/rspec_model_generation.JPG

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Jun 12 10:15:53 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Alexandre Da Silva)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 16:15:53 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <8D54256F-282C-440B-9767-E1BD11AAC0B6@gmail.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
	<8D54256F-282C-440B-9767-E1BD11AAC0B6@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2b1688de1bb19525ddc93c521b4832de@ruby-forum.com>

Bart Zonneveld wrote:
> On 12 jun 2009, at 13:42, Alexandre Da Silva wrote:
> 
>> Jarmo Pertman wrote:
>>> Do you have any files, which might be changed during your failing
>>> tests? Some temporary files or whatsoever? If that's the case, then
>>> autotest thinks that you have made some changes already and tries to
>>> run again. Solution would be to put that file into ignore list for
>>> autotest.
>>
>> No... all was working some days ago.
> 
> I have the same issue. Whether a red rspec or cucumber file, autotest
> goes beserk.
> Using the latest and greatest gems, on a fresh rails app.
> 
> gr,
> bartz

it seems that many people are getting the same,
at least for me and all developers from my two teams.

yesterday I realise that when I have green results, then I modify my 
controller files, than rspec does not auto restart the tests.
does anyone else having the same behavior?

att,
Alexandre
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 12 10:20:19 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:20:19 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906120720p5a32c281md7fee50650be5d9e@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Alexandre Da Silva<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Jarmo Pertman wrote:
>> Do you have any files, which might be changed during your failing
>> tests? Some temporary files or whatsoever? If that's the case, then
>> autotest thinks that you have made some changes already and tries to
>> run again. Solution would be to put that file into ignore list for
>> autotest.
>
> No... all was working some days ago.
> in fact the same issue occurs with a new fresh project. Here is my test
>
> rails blogapp
> cd blogapp
> script/generate rspec
> script/generate rspec_scaffold posts title:string body:text
> rake db:migrate
> autospec

I just copied this all into a shell and the specs ran only once and
stopped, as expected.

rspec-1.2.6
rspec-rails-1.2.6
ZenTest-4.1.1
Mac OS 10.5.7
ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) [universal-darwin9.0]

Anything different in your environment?

Also, I tried this with and without some autotest exceptions set up in
my ~/.autotest file, and it worked correctly in either case.

>
>
> This will cause error because posts is pluralized... so my autospec
> loops forever.
> all my applications are issuing the same behavior.
>
> I am with latest rspec and rspec-rails gems (1.2.6 I mean)
> when I back to my computer, I will provide a list of all my installed
> gems.
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From ben at benmabey.com  Fri Jun 12 10:36:32 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:36:32 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A3267F0.5080809@benmabey.com>


> I'm rambling now, and I've spent *way* too much of my workday on this
> message, so I'll just summarize:
>
> * Some easy things are complicated in RSpec;
> * Incomplete understanding of RSpec and a framework being spec'ed can
> create learning deadlock;
> * Novices need different answers than competent practitioners;
> * The community as a whole should be aware and respectful of the
> growth curve difficulty.
>
> If anyone had the patience to read this far, any thoughts?  Am I
> identifying real issues, or am I just full of hot air?
>
>
>   



Hi Stephen,
I did in fact read your entire message, but I'm running out of time so 
I'm afraid I can't reply with the thoughtful response that it deserves.  
Here is my brief gut reaction.. I totally agree about your observation 
WRT the Dreyfus model.  I've thought about how how it relates to TDD/BDD 
in the past and have made similar conclusions.  I think you are spot on 
about an expert not being able to really answer a novice's question very 
well.. because they are suffering from the "curse of knowledge" and it 
is hard to remember what it was like without all that knowledge. 
In general though I don't know if I really see all of this as a problem 
specific to RSpec.  The problem is that many people coming to RSpec are 
not just RSpec novices but are in fact TDD novices (and Rails, and Ruby 
novices too boot at times as well!).   TDD, like you said, is a skill 
apart from programming and is really separate from learning the 
mechanics of RSpec.  A well practiced TDDer without much Ruby experience 
is in a much better position to use RSpec effectively than an 
experienced Ruby dev with no TDD experience.  So if the real problem is 
that people don't know TDD/BDD I think outside of the RSpec community 
there are a lot of resources to draw on.  There are great TDD books in 
addition to lists dedicated to TDD, presentations on TDD, etc...  
Perhaps one step would be to link to these resources?  I also agree with 
Rick in that it just takes experience to learn this stuff since the 
answers to questions are so context specific.  Anyways, I gotta run, but 
I those were some of the thoughts I had.

Thanks,
Ben

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 12 10:38:14 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:38:14 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Mock and Stub objects
In-Reply-To: <573c067e105d12c6974eb5fc9fcfe203@ruby-forum.com>
References: <e7dfad42b4579d0853bdcf0e3d28862c@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906101056p1ad87614rab1392b03280113e@mail.gmail.com>
	<29526f4662fa39f1da04186918701984@ruby-forum.com>
	<46E063A1-C6AA-4D01-AEF8-C83F5460C800@mattwynne.net>
	<4f319adc94f989870fe60f6a7e59bf05@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906110636vd0e75a6oc43642dbb31e9040@mail.gmail.com>
	<1fb4df0906110936k311b882evd6a083bddb4b3822@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906110956m779b55b1m5827cffa53ce7a97@mail.gmail.com>
	<1fb4df0906111200u544d1b77s2ee30dad2349792a@mail.gmail.com>
	<573c067e105d12c6974eb5fc9fcfe203@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906120738h4b8b53adr1abae5d59cf7a64b@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 4:46 AM, Amit Kulkarni<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Even if we are using mocks and if our models are changed then also we
> need to change our spec.
> Same for if we don't use mocks.

This is true in some cases, but not in many of the common cases.
Here's an example:

describe WidgetsController do
  describe "POST create" do
    context "with valid attributes" do
      WidgetsController.stub(create!).and_return(true)
      post :create
      response.should redirect_to(widgets_path)
    end

    context "with invalid attributes" do
      WidgetsController.stub(create!).and_raise(ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid(mock_model(Widget)))
      post :create
      response.should render_template('new')
    end
  end
end

These two examples will never have to change due to a change in model
validation rules. The only reason they'd ever have to change would be
if you wanted to make a change the controller itself and how it
handles the create() action.

In this case we're using stubs, not mocks, but they are serving the
purpose of isolating change.

> So same question i am asking Are mocks really useful?
> Also When to use if at all we want to use?
> I searched on net regarding the same but till now no success :-)

Amit - you don't have to search the net. Steve, Matt and I have all
taken valuable time to try to explain this to you, and Matt even
posted some very useful links for you. From this thread, the RSpec
book, and those links, you've got enough information in front of you
to start answering these questions for yourself. Please take some time
to read some of this stuff. If you have any specific questions about
any of that reading material, please feel free to ask them.

Cheers,
David

>
> Also i had started writing controller specs without using mocks just to
> see how it works?Will it be ok?

You'll be fine if you don't use mocks. I'd be fine if I didn't use
mocks. I happen to know how and when to use them so I like to use
them.

Cheers,
David

> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From powertoaster at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 12 12:19:16 2009
From: powertoaster at hotmail.com (powertoaster)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:19:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] I am having a problem testing a date in a rails
 view
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906112239h52d66873t71e1fc7a679f0d95@mail.gmail.com>
References: <23992350.post@talk.nabble.com>
	<57c63afe0906112239h52d66873t71e1fc7a679f0d95@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <24002045.post@talk.nabble.com>



This is not an rspec failure message. What other gems do you have at play?

Also, what versions of rspec, rspec-rails, ruby, rails, OS, etc?

http://wiki.github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/get-in-touch

Rails 2.3.2
Ruby 1.8
Rspec 1.2.6
calendar_date_select 1.15 (I am not using this on the index page)
validates_date_time plugin in the model
(agilewebdevelopment.com/plugins/validates_date_time)

Running on windows using RubyMine 1.1.

I am using the default index.html.erb_spec.rb file generated from the
rspec-scaffold generator but added the fields for the tsdate since the
generator ignored that field for all of the view specs. It is in the model
stuff but none of the view specs. I assumed that it did not like the date
datatype in views.

In my index page I do use a custom date formatter
timesheets.tsdate.to_s(:timesheet) which I have defined in an initializers
time_formats.rb file.
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/I-am-having-a-problem-testing-a-date-in-a-rails-view-tp23992350p24002045.html
Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


From sfeley at gmail.com  Fri Jun 12 12:41:41 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:41:41 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <4A3267F0.5080809@benmabey.com>
References: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A3267F0.5080809@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com>

Ben and Rick,

Thanks very much to both of you for the encouraging responses.  Your
reply, Ben, came just in time as I was starting to wonder if I had
made a complete and irrevocable ass of myself.


On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Ben Mabey<ben at benmabey.com> wrote:
> In general though I don't know if I
> really see all of this as a problem specific to RSpec. ?The problem is that
> many people coming to RSpec are not just RSpec novices but are in fact TDD
> novices (and Rails, and Ruby novices too boot at times as well!).

FWIW, I agree totally.  In fact I re-read my message last night, and I
want to retract one of my statements for sure: the statement that
RSpec makes "some easy things easy, but other easy things very
complicated."

On deeper thought, I don't believe this is true.  RSpec doesn't make
anything harder than it already is.  There's nothing _wrong_ with
RSpec in this sense.  I think a more incisive statement would be that
with RSpec, some complicated things _feel like they should be easier._
 If only because other things feel so easy.  And newbies tend to
confront those problem areas at a point in the growth curve where the
complexity can be misinterpreted as them Just Not Getting It.  Some
are driven off as a result.

You're right about practice.  You're right that bringing together too
many learning curves at once creates interference patterns that
shouldn't be blamed on RSpec.  And Rick's reference to Martin Fowler's
spiked learning curve -- "this is scary, this is nifty, WHOOPS I
overdid it, this is okay in its place" -- is an excellent point.

But I don't think it's totally out-of-bounds to frame it as an "RSpec
problem," even if it isn't RSpec's fault.  The thing is...  Well...
There are *opportunities* here.  If RSpec -- along with its tools and
resources and culture -- was a little better at some of this stuff,
how much easier would it be to learn *everything else?*

How many of us learned BDD at the same time we learned programming?
...Show of hands?  Anyone?  The only developers who could make that
claim would have to be pretty fresh out of the pond.  If that does
apply to anyone reading this, please speak up -- I'd like to hear your
thoughts on how you're doing.

How many of us used TDD or BDD out of the gate when we learned Rails
or Ruby?  This is plausible, but I get the sense it's uncommon.  Most
of us don't even think to work on good testing practices until we
believe we're getting the rest of the stuff down.  I know I didn't.

Formal education in programming doesn't help.  Not by any evidence to
my eyes.  I've recently started seeing someone who's majoring in CS at
a well-known university, and he said the first class he took on
software design was in C.  Frickin' *C*.  _Then_ they did C++, and
then Java, but there was nothing significant about testing.  I told
him about Cucumber and it made his heart go pitter-patter.

The teaching resources for Rails and Ruby don't help.  Just about
every book makes a *nod* toward testing -- there's always a chapter,
they always say "do this constantly" -- but the chapter's inevitably
somewhere near the back, after everything else has been introduced.
Rails culture is passionate about testing, but most of us don't start
to tap into that culture until we're at 'Competent' or above.

What if the world were different?  What if teaching were different?
What if the predominant lessons people used to get started with Rails
*did not* start with "Type 'rails', make a scaffold, watch it fly!"
but instead started with, "What's the most important single piece of
information in your app?  Okay, great.  Write a spec like this.  Now
open up this file in /app/models..  [...]  Your spec passed, you're
cooking!  Now let's spec a view so we can see that information...  Now
let's spec a controller to bring them together..."

(Even better would be to start with Cucumber, which would take up very
little extra overhead in that type of tutorial.)

You get the gist.  What if learning Rails was *all about* learning
BDD?  Would it make the Rails stuff easier to understand and develop
competence faster?  I hypothesize that it would.

Some things need to be easier in BDD before we can get there.  To me
that means things need to be easier in RSpec.  I believe my tutorial
above would be easy enough to do today on the model side, but it's
just too cumbersome to write a view or controller spec.  You lose that
"holy crap look how *fast* this is coming!" vibe which is so
invigorating when you're doing something new.  We could make that
tutorial happen when writing a controller spec takes about as long as
writing the controller *code.*  There are some mitigators for this --
the Shoulda macros may be great for this now that they work with RSpec
-- but even so I think it's probably a little bit of wading into the
swamp.

I would like to see that world.  I'd like to help *make* it.  That
college guy I'm dating has asked me about learning Rails -- but I'm
planning to talk his ass off about Cucumber and RSpec before I agree
to help him with code.  I'm hoping he'll be my experiment to test my
hypothesis, and I'll get a better sense of just how easy or hard it is
to learn agile Web development if BDD happens at the ground floor.

Given time, I think the patterns facilitated by RSpec could
*completely* revolutionize the way software happens everywhere, *if*
the next generation of developers come to learn it first and not as an
"add-on."  And that's why I'm picking on RSpec.  I can't think of any
other technology in a better position to make this happen, with only
some moderate shifts of emphasis in both the tools and the culture.

Does anyone else think that'd be pretty cool?



-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com  Sat Jun 13 02:43:05 2009
From: Lee.Longmore at googlemail.com (Lee)
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:43:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Can I set params in before[:each] block?
In-Reply-To: <7B6873B8-EDDA-4C8E-8744-78E36A760059@mattwynne.net>
References: <9f033689-6ec7-4529-b6b2-92f4e161dd87@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
	<7B6873B8-EDDA-4C8E-8744-78E36A760059@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <d7875cce-eecc-4d04-8f32-d8e741e37e4c@j32g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>

Makes perfect sense. Thanks for the tip Matt!

On 12 June, 09:43, Matt Wynne <m... at mattwynne.net> wrote:
> On 12 Jun 2009, at 08:34, Lee wrote:
>
>
>
> > In my controller's create method, I have:
>
> > @sub_context = @context.create_sub_context(params[:context][:name])
>
> > If I do not specify params in the "post :create" call in my controller
> > spec then I get the following error for each example:
>
> > You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
> > You might have expected an instance of ActiveRecord::Base.
> > The error occurred while evaluating nil.[]
>
> > So I see that it is trying to access :name when :context is nil which
> > can be avoided if I ensure each post :create includes a params for
> > [:context][:name] e.g.
>
> > post :create, :context => {"name" => "Seniors"}
>
> > I am wondering if there is a way to avoid having to specify params in
> > each and every example by adding some code to a before[:each] block?
> > For example, the params are redundant in some examples e.g.
>
> > ? ?it "should save the context" do
> > ? ? ?@context.should_receive(:save)
> > ? ? ?post :create, :context => {"name" => "Seniors"}
> > ? ?end
>
> > Thanks.
>
> There are several ways of doing this. The pattern I tend to us is to ?
> create a method that does the post, and contains default parameters ?
> which you can override if you want to.
>
> describe "when the context has a name"
> ? ?def do_post(params = {})
> ? ? ?post :create, (:context => {"name" => "Seniors"}).merge(params)
> ? ?end
>
> ? ?it "should save the context" do
> ? ? ?@context.should_receive(:save)
> ? ? ?do_post
> ? ?end
> end
>
> Make sense?
>
> Matt Wynnehttp://beta.songkick.comhttp://blog.mattwynne.net
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From rjharmon0316 at yahoo.com  Sat Jun 13 11:42:13 2009
From: rjharmon0316 at yahoo.com (Randy Harmon)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 08:42:13 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Can I set params in before[:each] block?
In-Reply-To: <7B6873B8-EDDA-4C8E-8744-78E36A760059@mattwynne.net>
References: <9f033689-6ec7-4529-b6b2-92f4e161dd87@j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
	<7B6873B8-EDDA-4C8E-8744-78E36A760059@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <4A33C8D5.7030905@yahoo.com>

On 6/12/09 1:43 AM, Matt Wynne wrote back to Lee who said:
>> I am wondering if there is a way to avoid having to specify params in
>> each and every example by adding some code to a before[:each] block?
> There are several ways of doing this. The pattern I tend to us is to
> create a method that does the post, and contains default parameters
> which you can override if you want to.
For contrast, I'll describe the method I prefer.  The purpose of this
approach is to simplify and homogenize the interface of the "do it"
routine. By localizing the params in @instance variables, the raw
do_action() is a) easily called by you or the shared example group, b)
consistently named - the shared example doesn't have to care what action
is being done, and c) overridden with parameters at any level of nested
describe()s as you need.

describe "something" do
  before :each do
     @params = { :default => 'values' }
  end
  sub do_action
     post :create, @params
  end
  it_should_behave_like "some shared example group"
     # shared example calls back to our do_action, by convention
  describe "something else" do
     before do
       @params[:special_for_something_else] = 'setting'
       # other setup
     end

     it "whatever" do
       @params[:special_for_whatever] = 'value'
       do_action
     end
  end
end

Randy

From ben at benmabey.com  Sat Jun 13 11:57:10 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 09:57:10 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com>	<4A3267F0.5080809@benmabey.com>
	<1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A33CC56.9090406@benmabey.com>

Stephen Eley wrote:
> Ben and Rick,
>
> Thanks very much to both of you for the encouraging responses.  Your
> reply, Ben, came just in time as I was starting to wonder if I had
> made a complete and irrevocable ass of myself.
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Ben Mabey<ben at benmabey.com> wrote:
>   
>> In general though I don't know if I
>> really see all of this as a problem specific to RSpec.  The problem is that
>> many people coming to RSpec are not just RSpec novices but are in fact TDD
>> novices (and Rails, and Ruby novices too boot at times as well!).
>>     
>
> FWIW, I agree totally.  In fact I re-read my message last night, and I
> want to retract one of my statements for sure: the statement that
> RSpec makes "some easy things easy, but other easy things very
> complicated."
>
> On deeper thought, I don't believe this is true.  RSpec doesn't make
> anything harder than it already is.  There's nothing _wrong_ with
> RSpec in this sense.  I think a more incisive statement would be that
> with RSpec, some complicated things _feel like they should be easier._
>  If only because other things feel so easy.  And newbies tend to
> confront those problem areas at a point in the growth curve where the
> complexity can be misinterpreted as them Just Not Getting It.  Some
> are driven off as a result.
>
> You're right about practice.  You're right that bringing together too
> many learning curves at once creates interference patterns that
> shouldn't be blamed on RSpec.  And Rick's reference to Martin Fowler's
> spiked learning curve -- "this is scary, this is nifty, WHOOPS I
> overdid it, this is okay in its place" -- is an excellent point.
>
> But I don't think it's totally out-of-bounds to frame it as an "RSpec
> problem," even if it isn't RSpec's fault.  The thing is...  Well...
> There are *opportunities* here.  If RSpec -- along with its tools and
> resources and culture -- was a little better at some of this stuff,
> how much easier would it be to learn *everything else?*
>
> How many of us learned BDD at the same time we learned programming?
> ...Show of hands?  Anyone?  The only developers who could make that
> claim would have to be pretty fresh out of the pond.  If that does
> apply to anyone reading this, please speak up -- I'd like to hear your
> thoughts on how you're doing.
>
> How many of us used TDD or BDD out of the gate when we learned Rails
> or Ruby?  This is plausible, but I get the sense it's uncommon.  Most
> of us don't even think to work on good testing practices until we
> believe we're getting the rest of the stuff down.  I know I didn't.
>   

When learning a new technology I generally don't bother with testing let 
alone TDD (unless I think TDD could help the learning process).   It is 
like spiking and most of the stuff you are creating is throw-away code 
that won't need to be maintained.  There are times, like this, where 
testing isn't needed IMO.  But that isn't really your question is it.. 
You're wondering what effect teaching good testing practices up front 
would bring...  I've wondered this my self at times (in fact I'm helping 
prepare an intro rails course now and wresting with this very issue) and 
it seems like teaching good testing to people who don't even know OO can 
be like jumping in to the deep end of the pool.

> Formal education in programming doesn't help.  Not by any evidence to
> my eyes.  I've recently started seeing someone who's majoring in CS at
> a well-known university, and he said the first class he took on
> software design was in C.  Frickin' *C*.  _Then_ they did C++, and
> then Java, but there was nothing significant about testing.  I told
> him about Cucumber and it made his heart go pitter-patter.
>   

I hear this complaint quite often and FWIW it is an untrue stereotype 
IME.  While I was at the university I was taught testing, design 
patterns, refactoring, Agile methodologies, pair programming, use cases, 
CI, etc...  In fact the first time I heard about TDD was in my first 
Java class where the professor would TDD all of his work in the lectures 
(live coding!).  We did team projects where we had a CI server setup and 
we were required to have tests and do pair programming at least part of 
the time.  We also had class projects where different teams would create 
different components and we had to work out our communication protocols, 
touch points, and integrate it all.  Anyways, I justed wanted to throw 
that out and say that formal education isn't totally failing like some 
people claim it is.  Only my "Software Engineering" courses taught and 
encouraged these practices, but I was still taught them.

> The teaching resources for Rails and Ruby don't help.  Just about
> every book makes a *nod* toward testing -- there's always a chapter,
> they always say "do this constantly" -- but the chapter's inevitably
> somewhere near the back, after everything else has been introduced.
> Rails culture is passionate about testing, but most of us don't start
> to tap into that culture until we're at 'Competent' or above.
>
> What if the world were different?  What if teaching were different?
> What if the predominant lessons people used to get started with Rails
> *did not* start with "Type 'rails', make a scaffold, watch it fly!"
> but instead started with, "What's the most important single piece of
> information in your app?  Okay, great.  Write a spec like this.  Now
> open up this file in /app/models..  [...]  Your spec passed, you're
> cooking!  Now let's spec a view so we can see that information...  Now
> let's spec a controller to bring them together..."
>
> (Even better would be to start with Cucumber, which would take up very
> little extra overhead in that type of tutorial.)
>   


So...  From what I have seen people with little experience testing are 
able to pick up the notion of integration/acceptance testing a lot 
faster than object level testing.  So, I do think having a tutorial 
drive all the features out with Cucumber or just webrat+some testing 
framework isn't far fetched at all.  Object level examples are a 
different story though IME... 
> You get the gist.  What if learning Rails was *all about* learning
> BDD?  Would it make the Rails stuff easier to understand and develop
> competence faster?  I hypothesize that it would.
>
> Some things need to be easier in BDD before we can get there.  To me
> that means things need to be easier in RSpec.  I believe my tutorial
> above would be easy enough to do today on the model side, but it's
> just too cumbersome to write a view or controller spec.  You lose that
> "holy crap look how *fast* this is coming!" vibe which is so
> invigorating when you're doing something new.  We could make that
> tutorial happen when writing a controller spec takes about as long as
> writing the controller *code.*  There are some mitigators for this --
> the Shoulda macros may be great for this now that they work with RSpec
> -- but even so I think it's probably a little bit of wading into the
> swamp.
>
> I would like to see that world.  I'd like to help *make* it.  That
> college guy I'm dating has asked me about learning Rails -- but I'm
> planning to talk his ass off about Cucumber and RSpec before I agree
> to help him with code.  I'm hoping he'll be my experiment to test my
> hypothesis, and I'll get a better sense of just how easy or hard it is
> to learn agile Web development if BDD happens at the ground floor.
>
> Given time, I think the patterns facilitated by RSpec could
> *completely* revolutionize the way software happens everywhere, *if*
> the next generation of developers come to learn it first and not as an
> "add-on."  And that's why I'm picking on RSpec.  I can't think of any
> other technology in a better position to make this happen, with only
> some moderate shifts of emphasis in both the tools and the culture.
>
> Does anyone else think that'd be pretty cool?
>   
Yeah, I think having such resources available would be very cool.  The 
most common complaint I hear in IRC rooms is that there is no good 
sample rails app that makes good use of RSpec and Cucumber.  I think 
there are some examples out there, but an app built as a tutorial would 
be much more helpful with the proper git tags and such.  I mentioned 
before that I was helping prepare a rails course.  This is with my local 
Ruby group and we have started on a tutorial app: 
http://github.com/urug/media_lender/tree/master
It thought it would be cool to use this project and BDD all the way 
through and teach it like that.  However, I have other commitments so 
other people in the group will probably do most of the work without 
BDD... It is something I would like to revisit someday and provide such 
an app.  Have you started on a tutorial app like this yet?

-Ben


From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sat Jun 13 17:19:19 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Alexandre Da Silva)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 23:19:19 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906120720p5a32c281md7fee50650be5d9e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120720p5a32c281md7fee50650be5d9e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f030ae97c4095b0ca7579982ac4ec9f6@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Alexandre Da 
> Silva<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>> rails blogapp
>> cd blogapp
>> script/generate rspec
>> script/generate rspec_scaffold posts title:string body:text
>> rake db:migrate
>> autospec
> 
> I just copied this all into a shell and the specs ran only once and
> stopped, as expected.
> 
> rspec-1.2.6
> rspec-rails-1.2.6
> ZenTest-4.1.1
> Mac OS 10.5.7
> ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) [universal-darwin9.0]
> 
> Anything different in your environment?
> 
> Also, I tried this with and without some autotest exceptions set up in
> my ~/.autotest file, and it worked correctly in either case.

gems are the same... but I have a lot of other gems. I tested removing 
all gems and reinstaling one by one... after all gems installed (except 
remarkable gem) the test above ran as expected.

After some inspects I found in different projects two possible sources 
of the problem.

Source one: remarkable gem
if you use remarkable, try do uninstall that gem and test if the testes 
continue looping

Source two: localized_dates plugin
if you use this plugin try removing it and run the tests again. I mean 
that localized_dates plugin is not needed in rails 2.3.3 anymore.



-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dgoldie15 at gmail.com  Sat Jun 13 17:30:08 2009
From: dgoldie15 at gmail.com (Doug)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 14:30:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] removing Mocha;
	'spec spec' fails but the specific model file passes
Message-ID: <7c6f7cdb-7c4f-43a9-85df-0f1c45dab029@y34g2000prb.googlegroups.com>

I happened to mix ryan bates' authentication scaffold with
rspec_scaffold on a  demo project.
and ran into the problem of mixing mock frameworks...ryan uses mocha.

So, as a learning experience, I choose to redo ryan's tests without
mocha but ran into a strange problem with tests of the User model.

With debugging you can see....
If you run just the user_spec.rb file, everything is fine....rspec
goes through the User model.
However, if you run all the specs, it is somehow still using mocha
instead of the User model.

How is this possible since I removed the configuration for mocha.?

In spec_helper.rb, I commented out the   line: #
config.mock_with :mocha
I also saw a require 'mocha' statement in test_helper that I removed.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11:41 /c/work/quizmaker_demo (questions)$ spec spec
...................................c:/work/quizmaker_demo/spec/models/
user_spec.rb:86
User.authenticate('nonexisting', 'secret').should be_nil
(rdb:1) s
c:/tools/ruby/ruby186/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/mocha-0.9.5/lib/mocha/
class_method.rb:40
stubbee.__metaclass__.class_eval("def #{method}(*args, &block);
mocha.method_missing(:#{method}, *a
(rdb:1) c



From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sat Jun 13 20:35:13 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2009 19:35:13 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] removing Mocha;
	'spec spec' fails but the specific 	model file passes
In-Reply-To: <7c6f7cdb-7c4f-43a9-85df-0f1c45dab029@y34g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
References: <7c6f7cdb-7c4f-43a9-85df-0f1c45dab029@y34g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906131735r36184a03g507859d2acf8c3aa@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Doug<dgoldie15 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I happened to mix ryan bates' authentication scaffold with
> rspec_scaffold on a ?demo project.
> and ran into the problem of mixing mock frameworks...ryan uses mocha.
>
> So, as a learning experience, I choose to redo ryan's tests without
> mocha but ran into a strange problem with tests of the User model.
>
> With debugging you can see....
> If you run just the user_spec.rb file, everything is fine....rspec
> goes through the User model.
> However, if you run all the specs, it is somehow still using mocha
> instead of the User model.
>
> How is this possible since I removed the configuration for mocha.?

In rails 2.3, activesupport/lib/active_support/test_case.rb requires
mocha. That's the base class for all of the rails test cases, and
consequently, rspec example groups as well.

> In spec_helper.rb, I commented out the ? line: #
> config.mock_with :mocha
> I also saw a require 'mocha' statement in test_helper that I removed.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> 11:41 /c/work/quizmaker_demo (questions)$ spec spec
> ...................................c:/work/quizmaker_demo/spec/models/
> user_spec.rb:86
> User.authenticate('nonexisting', 'secret').should be_nil
> (rdb:1) s
> c:/tools/ruby/ruby186/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/mocha-0.9.5/lib/mocha/
> class_method.rb:40
> stubbee.__metaclass__.class_eval("def #{method}(*args, &block);
> mocha.method_missing(:#{method}, *a
> (rdb:1) c
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From 36srinu at gmail.com  Mon Jun 15 01:25:41 2009
From: 36srinu at gmail.com (srinu)
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 22:25:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Spec for image upload and resizing
Message-ID: <179fc737-abca-48ce-a434-ff23cb03ec7b@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>

Hi,

    I have a written spec for image upload model using paperclip plug-
in. The sample code looks like

http://gist.github.com/129954

Testing the upload image just not validation and saving to database,
its about the input image has got cropped or not if the input image
size exceeds the 600x600px. My input test images are saved in fixtures
folder.

 But every time I run the test images are saving. Is there any way to
test my asset model?

Thanks in advance
Srinivas

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Mon Jun 15 02:42:53 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Ninad Pol)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:42:53 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem while generating rspec model in Rails
	Project
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906120713s668371a5ta0fde3035282b4aa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b6d18e516aac6bebcaa83dbf3222173@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120713s668371a5ta0fde3035282b4aa@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ab1869f9ed4453b53e99aa8fc1a5af6e@ruby-forum.com>

Thanks for your reply.

No, above command does not give me same error. However it creates only 
the model file under \app\models and asks whether to overwrite it. But 
my aim is to create rspec file under \spec\models with the actual model 
file created under \app\models remaining unchanged. So using the rails 
generator does not meet my objective and i have to use rspec generator 
to meet the requirement.

Ideal schenario should be that rspec generator creates the desired rspec 
file under \spec\models and while creating actual model file under 
\app\models it should ask for whether to overwrite it. I am not getting 
this schenario may be because i am missing something.It would be really 
helpful if you could help me out in this.


David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Ninad Pol<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>>
>> by on Rails.
>>
>>
>> So can anybody please help me out regarding this issue. whether this is
>> related to version problem or what else earliest?
> 
> I'm not sure where this message is coming from but it's not coming
> from rspec. Have you tried generating with the rails generator?
> 
> ruby script/generate model Client
> 
> Does that give you the same error?

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From zuperinfinite at gmail.com  Mon Jun 15 08:18:33 2009
From: zuperinfinite at gmail.com (Bart Zonneveld)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:18:33 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <f030ae97c4095b0ca7579982ac4ec9f6@ruby-forum.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120720p5a32c281md7fee50650be5d9e@mail.gmail.com>
	<f030ae97c4095b0ca7579982ac4ec9f6@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <0CBFC0A2-8500-485F-AEDE-5DBF527202A7@gmail.com>


On Jun 13, 2009, at 11:19 PM, Alexandre Da Silva wrote:

> David Chelimsky wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Alexandre Da
>> Silva<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>>> rails blogapp
>>> cd blogapp
>>> script/generate rspec
>>> script/generate rspec_scaffold posts title:string body:text
>>> rake db:migrate
>>> autospec
>>
>> I just copied this all into a shell and the specs ran only once and
>> stopped, as expected.
>>
>> rspec-1.2.6
>> rspec-rails-1.2.6
>> ZenTest-4.1.1
>> Mac OS 10.5.7
>> ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) [universal-darwin9.0]
>>
>> Anything different in your environment?
>>
>> Also, I tried this with and without some autotest exceptions set up  
>> in
>> my ~/.autotest file, and it worked correctly in either case.
>
> gems are the same... but I have a lot of other gems. I tested removing
> all gems and reinstaling one by one... after all gems installed  
> (except
> remarkable gem) the test above ran as expected.
>
> After some inspects I found in different projects two possible sources
> of the problem.
>
> Source one: remarkable gem
> if you use remarkable, try do uninstall that gem and test if the  
> testes
> continue looping
>
> Source two: localized_dates plugin
> if you use this plugin try removing it and run the tests again. I mean
> that localized_dates plugin is not needed in rails 2.3.3 anymore.

I don't have these plugins or gems, but I found out that downgrading  
ZenTest to version 4.0.0 solved the problem.

HTH,
bartz


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 15 08:34:36 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 07:34:36 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem while generating rspec model in Rails
	Project
In-Reply-To: <ab1869f9ed4453b53e99aa8fc1a5af6e@ruby-forum.com>
References: <6b6d18e516aac6bebcaa83dbf3222173@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120713s668371a5ta0fde3035282b4aa@mail.gmail.com>
	<ab1869f9ed4453b53e99aa8fc1a5af6e@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906150534j6f7341a4n7436ff426fdc2687@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Ninad Pol<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your reply.
>
> No, above command does not give me same error. However it creates only
> the model file under \app\models and asks whether to overwrite it. But
> my aim is to create rspec file under \spec\models with the actual model
> file created under \app\models remaining unchanged. So using the rails
> generator does not meet my objective and i have to use rspec generator
> to meet the requirement.

I wasn't trying to meet your requirement with this - just trying to
narrow down the problem.

> Ideal schenario should be that rspec generator creates the desired rspec
> file under \spec\models and while creating actual model file under
> \app\models it should ask for whether to overwrite it. I am not getting
> this schenario may be because i am missing something.It would be really
> helpful if you could help me out in this.

The rails code that triggers this will always raise this error if the
Client constant (in your case) is already defined. This normally
doesn't conflict with files in your app because they are not loaded
when you run generators. So it seems that something other than
app/models/client.rb is getting loaded that defines the Client
constant (either a class or a module).

Do you have any plugins that define a Client? Or perhaps you've got
some extension in the lib directory?

> David Chelimsky wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Ninad Pol<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> by on Rails.
>>>
>>>
>>> So can anybody please help me out regarding this issue. whether this is
>>> related to version problem or what else earliest?
>>
>> I'm not sure where this message is coming from but it's not coming
>> from rspec. Have you tried generating with the rails generator?
>>
>> ruby script/generate model Client
>>
>> Does that give you the same error?
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 15 08:36:25 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 07:36:25 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <0CBFC0A2-8500-485F-AEDE-5DBF527202A7@gmail.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120720p5a32c281md7fee50650be5d9e@mail.gmail.com>
	<f030ae97c4095b0ca7579982ac4ec9f6@ruby-forum.com>
	<0CBFC0A2-8500-485F-AEDE-5DBF527202A7@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906150536i711e3799k9cc9ca8fdb780d88@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:18 AM, Bart Zonneveld<zuperinfinite at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Jun 13, 2009, at 11:19 PM, Alexandre Da Silva wrote:
>
>> David Chelimsky wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Alexandre Da
>>> Silva<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> rails blogapp
>>>> cd blogapp
>>>> script/generate rspec
>>>> script/generate rspec_scaffold posts title:string body:text
>>>> rake db:migrate
>>>> autospec
>>>
>>> I just copied this all into a shell and the specs ran only once and
>>> stopped, as expected.
>>>
>>> rspec-1.2.6
>>> rspec-rails-1.2.6
>>> ZenTest-4.1.1
>>> Mac OS 10.5.7
>>> ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) [universal-darwin9.0]
>>>
>>> Anything different in your environment?
>>>
>>> Also, I tried this with and without some autotest exceptions set up in
>>> my ~/.autotest file, and it worked correctly in either case.
>>
>> gems are the same... but I have a lot of other gems. I tested removing
>> all gems and reinstaling one by one... after all gems installed (except
>> remarkable gem) the test above ran as expected.
>>
>> After some inspects I found in different projects two possible sources
>> of the problem.
>>
>> Source one: remarkable gem
>> if you use remarkable, try do uninstall that gem and test if the testes
>> continue looping
>>
>> Source two: localized_dates plugin
>> if you use this plugin try removing it and run the tests again. I mean
>> that localized_dates plugin is not needed in rails 2.3.3 anymore.
>
> I don't have these plugins or gems, but I found out that downgrading ZenTest
> to version 4.0.0 solved the problem.

Did you install the autotest-rails gem per the ZenTest 4.1 release notes?

>
> HTH,
> bartz
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Mon Jun 15 09:04:07 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Ninad Pol)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:04:07 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem while generating rspec model in Rails
	Project
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906150534j6f7341a4n7436ff426fdc2687@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b6d18e516aac6bebcaa83dbf3222173@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120713s668371a5ta0fde3035282b4aa@mail.gmail.com>
	<ab1869f9ed4453b53e99aa8fc1a5af6e@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906150534j6f7341a4n7436ff426fdc2687@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9899a026050777dbe6b12120a7abbddd@ruby-forum.com>

I think this problem is not related any plugin (that define a client) 
simply because if i try it with any other ruby file(other than 
Client.rb) also i am facing same problem.And what do you mean by some 
extension in the lib directory?


David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Ninad Pol<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>> Thanks for your reply.
>>
>> No, above command does not give me same error. However it creates only
>> the model file under \app\models and asks whether to overwrite it. But
>> my aim is to create rspec file under \spec\models with the actual model
>> file created under \app\models remaining unchanged. So using the rails
>> generator does not meet my objective and i have to use rspec generator
>> to meet the requirement.
> 
> I wasn't trying to meet your requirement with this - just trying to
> narrow down the problem.
> 
>> Ideal schenario should be that rspec generator creates the desired rspec
>> file under \spec\models and while creating actual model file under
>> \app\models it should ask for whether to overwrite it. I am not getting
>> this schenario may be because i am missing something.It would be really
>> helpful if you could help me out in this.
> 
> The rails code that triggers this will always raise this error if the
> Client constant (in your case) is already defined. This normally
> doesn't conflict with files in your app because they are not loaded
> when you run generators. So it seems that something other than
> app/models/client.rb is getting loaded that defines the Client
> constant (either a class or a module).
> 
> Do you have any plugins that define a Client? Or perhaps you've got
> some extension in the lib directory?

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 15 09:18:40 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:18:40 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem while generating rspec model in Rails
	Project
In-Reply-To: <9899a026050777dbe6b12120a7abbddd@ruby-forum.com>
References: <6b6d18e516aac6bebcaa83dbf3222173@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120713s668371a5ta0fde3035282b4aa@mail.gmail.com>
	<ab1869f9ed4453b53e99aa8fc1a5af6e@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906150534j6f7341a4n7436ff426fdc2687@mail.gmail.com>
	<9899a026050777dbe6b12120a7abbddd@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906150618o7feb45e1pa359303de19dcf6@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Ninad Pol<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> I think this problem is not related any plugin (that define a client)
> simply because if i try it with any other ruby file(other than
> Client.rb) also i am facing same problem.

So if you do this:

rails widgets
cd widgets
script\generate model widget
script\generate rspec
script\generate rspec_model widget

The last command tells you that Widget is already defined?

> And what do you mean by some extension in the lib directory?

I mean that you have a file in the lib directory in your Rails project
that defines a client. I believe that loading the rails env (which
happens when you run script\generate) loads the lib directory, so if
you have a file in there that defines Client, then you'd run into this
problem.

>
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Ninad Pol<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks for your reply.
>>>
>>> No, above command does not give me same error. However it creates only
>>> the model file under \app\models and asks whether to overwrite it. But
>>> my aim is to create rspec file under \spec\models with the actual model
>>> file created under \app\models remaining unchanged. So using the rails
>>> generator does not meet my objective and i have to use rspec generator
>>> to meet the requirement.
>>
>> I wasn't trying to meet your requirement with this - just trying to
>> narrow down the problem.
>>
>>> Ideal schenario should be that rspec generator creates the desired rspec
>>> file under \spec\models and while creating actual model file under
>>> \app\models it should ask for whether to overwrite it. I am not getting
>>> this schenario may be because i am missing something.It would be really
>>> helpful if you could help me out in this.
>>
>> The rails code that triggers this will always raise this error if the
>> Client constant (in your case) is already defined. This normally
>> doesn't conflict with files in your app because they are not loaded
>> when you run generators. So it seems that something other than
>> app/models/client.rb is getting loaded that defines the Client
>> constant (either a class or a module).
>>
>> Do you have any plugins that define a Client? Or perhaps you've got
>> some extension in the lib directory?
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From sfeley at gmail.com  Mon Jun 15 09:41:38 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:41:38 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Spec for image upload and resizing
In-Reply-To: <179fc737-abca-48ce-a434-ff23cb03ec7b@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
References: <179fc737-abca-48ce-a434-ff23cb03ec7b@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906150641r374b5cccxbc0cacdb349b52f1@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:25 AM, srinu<36srinu at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ?But every time I run the test images are saving. Is there any way to
> test my asset model?

Well, it does have to save the processed image *somewhere* or you're
not going to have anything to measure.  My suggestion would be to
override Paperclip's file path with a temporary directory (the
'tempdir' standard library can make one for you easily) in a
before(:all) or before(:each), and then delete the temporary directory
when you're done.


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From scott at railsnewbie.com  Mon Jun 15 09:43:12 2009
From: scott at railsnewbie.com (Scott Taylor)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:43:12 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork and Merb and rSpec
In-Reply-To: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com>
References: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com>
Message-ID: <4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>

Andy Shipman wrote:
> When running spork on a merb application, whenever a spec is run I get 
> the following error from the Spork server. 
>
> /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/merb-core-1.0.11/lib/merb-core/bootloader.rb:1358: 
> [BUG] rb_gc_mark(): unknown data type 0x3c(0x2203d0) non object
> ruby 1.8.7 (2009-06-08 patchlevel 173) [i686-darwin9]
>
> Which crashes the Spork server.

Have you tried it on 1.8.6?

Scott

>
> Anyone else out there had experience in getting Merb and Spork running 
> together nicely? 
>
> Andy Shipman
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From zuperinfinite at gmail.com  Mon Jun 15 09:56:22 2009
From: zuperinfinite at gmail.com (Bart Zonneveld)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:56:22 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906150536i711e3799k9cc9ca8fdb780d88@mail.gmail.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120720p5a32c281md7fee50650be5d9e@mail.gmail.com>
	<f030ae97c4095b0ca7579982ac4ec9f6@ruby-forum.com>
	<0CBFC0A2-8500-485F-AEDE-5DBF527202A7@gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906150536i711e3799k9cc9ca8fdb780d88@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7733F66C-5813-47D3-9B0D-95FB8F721E9C@gmail.com>


On Jun 15, 2009, at 2:36 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:18 AM, Bart Zonneveld<zuperinfinite at gmail.com 
> > wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 13, 2009, at 11:19 PM, Alexandre Da Silva wrote:
>>
>>> David Chelimsky wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 6:42 AM, Alexandre Da
>>>> Silva<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> rails blogapp
>>>>> cd blogapp
>>>>> script/generate rspec
>>>>> script/generate rspec_scaffold posts title:string body:text
>>>>> rake db:migrate
>>>>> autospec
>>>>
>>>> I just copied this all into a shell and the specs ran only once and
>>>> stopped, as expected.
>>>>
>>>> rspec-1.2.6
>>>> rspec-rails-1.2.6
>>>> ZenTest-4.1.1
>>>> Mac OS 10.5.7
>>>> ruby 1.8.6 (2008-08-11 patchlevel 287) [universal-darwin9.0]
>>>>
>>>> Anything different in your environment?
>>>>
>>>> Also, I tried this with and without some autotest exceptions set  
>>>> up in
>>>> my ~/.autotest file, and it worked correctly in either case.
>>>
>>> gems are the same... but I have a lot of other gems. I tested  
>>> removing
>>> all gems and reinstaling one by one... after all gems installed  
>>> (except
>>> remarkable gem) the test above ran as expected.
>>>
>>> After some inspects I found in different projects two possible  
>>> sources
>>> of the problem.
>>>
>>> Source one: remarkable gem
>>> if you use remarkable, try do uninstall that gem and test if the  
>>> testes
>>> continue looping
>>>
>>> Source two: localized_dates plugin
>>> if you use this plugin try removing it and run the tests again. I  
>>> mean
>>> that localized_dates plugin is not needed in rails 2.3.3 anymore.
>>
>> I don't have these plugins or gems, but I found out that  
>> downgrading ZenTest
>> to version 4.0.0 solved the problem.
>
> Did you install the autotest-rails gem per the ZenTest 4.1 release  
> notes?

Of course not :).
I just ran sudo gem update :).
Will check, and report back though.

gr,
bartz


From lists at ruby-forum.com  Mon Jun 15 10:18:49 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Carlos A. da silva)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:18:49 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906150536i711e3799k9cc9ca8fdb780d88@mail.gmail.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0904061650v473ffeb4g2ae978d1ba00bed2@mail.gmail.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120720p5a32c281md7fee50650be5d9e@mail.gmail.com>
	<f030ae97c4095b0ca7579982ac4ec9f6@ruby-forum.com>
	<0CBFC0A2-8500-485F-AEDE-5DBF527202A7@gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906150536i711e3799k9cc9ca8fdb780d88@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d11592fb82484eb92ee74bd91beed5eb@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:18 AM, Bart Zonneveld<zuperinfinite at gmail.com> 
> wrote:
>>>>> script/generate rspec
>>>> Mac OS 10.5.7
>>>
>>
>> I don't have these plugins or gems, but I found out that downgrading ZenTest
>> to version 4.0.0 solved the problem.
> 
> Did you install the autotest-rails gem per the ZenTest 4.1 release 
> notes?

Same issue here..

Installed autotest-rails gem and everything is working fine now.

Thanks.

Carlos.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 15 10:32:59 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 09:32:59 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Autospec Infinite Loop ??
In-Reply-To: <d11592fb82484eb92ee74bd91beed5eb@ruby-forum.com>
References: <80248ec8-a49b-492b-b63f-c5a46cc0e6a3@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>
	<540e6cab9a9bfcd63526d67d72e5711e@ruby-forum.com>
	<00d23d04d6958aba373e1979ceba08ee@ruby-forum.com>
	<39d26454-a1f4-42ed-8d08-33ed10496fb3@i6g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
	<967ea10f39707c878dc48489aa8d81c7@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120720p5a32c281md7fee50650be5d9e@mail.gmail.com>
	<f030ae97c4095b0ca7579982ac4ec9f6@ruby-forum.com>
	<0CBFC0A2-8500-485F-AEDE-5DBF527202A7@gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906150536i711e3799k9cc9ca8fdb780d88@mail.gmail.com>
	<d11592fb82484eb92ee74bd91beed5eb@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906150732s6a429de0n5d79cfa764f85729@mail.gmail.com>

OK - top posting here so everyone on this thread will see this:

If you upgrade to ZenTest 4.1, you must install the autotest-rails gem
or you will get unexpected results.

http://blog.davidchelimsky.net/2009/06/08/upgrading-to-zentest-410/

Cheers,
David

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Carlos A. da silva<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> David Chelimsky wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 7:18 AM, Bart Zonneveld<zuperinfinite at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>>> script/generate rspec
>>>>> Mac OS 10.5.7
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't have these plugins or gems, but I found out that downgrading ZenTest
>>> to version 4.0.0 solved the problem.
>>
>> Did you install the autotest-rails gem per the ZenTest 4.1 release
>> notes?
>
> Same issue here..
>
> Installed autotest-rails gem and everything is working fine now.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Carlos.
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From andy at cllearview.com  Mon Jun 15 16:11:55 2009
From: andy at cllearview.com (Andy Shipman)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 21:11:55 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork and Merb and rSpec
In-Reply-To: <4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>
References: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com>
	<4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>
Message-ID: <FE6B370A-E045-4EE7-BEE6-8B587200C4C8@cllearview.com>


On 15 Jun 2009, at 14:43, Scott Taylor wrote:

> Andy Shipman wrote:
>> When running spork on a merb application, whenever a spec is run I  
>> get the following error from the Spork server.
>> /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/merb-core-1.0.11/lib/merb-core/ 
>> bootloader.rb:1358: [BUG] rb_gc_mark(): unknown data type  
>> 0x3c(0x2203d0) non object
>> ruby 1.8.7 (2009-06-08 patchlevel 173) [i686-darwin9]
>>
>> Which crashes the Spork server.
>
> Have you tried it on 1.8.6?

I have now and it works on 1.8.6. Thanks for the suggestion.

>
> Scott
>
>>
>> Anyone else out there had experience in getting Merb and Spork  
>> running together nicely?
>> Andy Shipman
>>


From scott at railsnewbie.com  Mon Jun 15 17:01:47 2009
From: scott at railsnewbie.com (Scott Taylor)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 17:01:47 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork and Merb and rSpec
In-Reply-To: <FE6B370A-E045-4EE7-BEE6-8B587200C4C8@cllearview.com>
References: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com>
	<4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>
	<FE6B370A-E045-4EE7-BEE6-8B587200C4C8@cllearview.com>
Message-ID: <5D8C3325-5E86-47CC-95DE-F9387C03B2F0@railsnewbie.com>


On Jun 15, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Andy Shipman wrote:

>
> On 15 Jun 2009, at 14:43, Scott Taylor wrote:
>
>> Andy Shipman wrote:
>>> When running spork on a merb application, whenever a spec is run I  
>>> get the following error from the Spork server.
>>> /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/merb-core-1.0.11/lib/merb-core/ 
>>> bootloader.rb:1358: [BUG] rb_gc_mark(): unknown data type  
>>> 0x3c(0x2203d0) non object
>>> ruby 1.8.7 (2009-06-08 patchlevel 173) [i686-darwin9]
>>>
>>> Which crashes the Spork server.
>>
>> Have you tried it on 1.8.6?
>
> I have now and it works on 1.8.6. Thanks for the suggestion.

I'd suggest filing a bug on their tracker, wherever it may lie.

Scott


>
>
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>>
>>> Anyone else out there had experience in getting Merb and Spork  
>>> running together nicely?
>>> Andy Shipman
>>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From 36srinu at gmail.com  Tue Jun 16 00:49:21 2009
From: 36srinu at gmail.com (srinu)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 21:49:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Spec for image upload and resizing
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906150641r374b5cccxbc0cacdb349b52f1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <179fc737-abca-48ce-a434-ff23cb03ec7b@r31g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
	<1fb4df0906150641r374b5cccxbc0cacdb349b52f1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a192a3ba-93a8-4387-a36d-1a3d1a797630@i28g2000prd.googlegroups.com>

Well, thanks for the reply, as you suggested it is a better way to
override the file path.

Thanks
Srinivas

On Jun 15, 6:41?pm, Stephen Eley <sfe... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:25 AM, srinu<36sr... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > ?But every time I run the test images are saving. Is there any way to
> > test my asset model?
>
> Well, it does have to save the processed image *somewhere* or you're
> not going to have anything to measure. ?My suggestion would be to
> override Paperclip's file path with a temporary directory (the
> 'tempdir' standard library can make one for you easily) in a
> before(:all) or before(:each), and then delete the temporary directory
> when you're done.
>
> --
> Have Fun,
> ? ?Steve Eley (sfe... at gmail.com)
> ? ?ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
> ? ?http://www.escapepod.org
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From ben at benmabey.com  Tue Jun 16 00:51:21 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 22:51:21 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork and Merb and rSpec
In-Reply-To: <5D8C3325-5E86-47CC-95DE-F9387C03B2F0@railsnewbie.com>
References: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com>	<4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>	<FE6B370A-E045-4EE7-BEE6-8B587200C4C8@cllearview.com>
	<5D8C3325-5E86-47CC-95DE-F9387C03B2F0@railsnewbie.com>
Message-ID: <4A3724C9.6000104@benmabey.com>

Scott Taylor wrote:
>
> On Jun 15, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Andy Shipman wrote:
>
>>
>> On 15 Jun 2009, at 14:43, Scott Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> Andy Shipman wrote:
>>>> When running spork on a merb application, whenever a spec is run I 
>>>> get the following error from the Spork server.
>>>> /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/merb-core-1.0.11/lib/merb-core/bootloader.rb:1358: 
>>>> [BUG] rb_gc_mark(): unknown data type 0x3c(0x2203d0) non object
>>>> ruby 1.8.7 (2009-06-08 patchlevel 173) [i686-darwin9]
>>>>
>>>> Which crashes the Spork server.
>>>
>>> Have you tried it on 1.8.6?
>>
>> I have now and it works on 1.8.6. Thanks for the suggestion.
>
> I'd suggest filing a bug on their tracker, wherever it may lie.
>
> Scott


Spork uses github issues.  Also, FYI, spork has it's own mailing list: 
http://groups.google.com/group/sporkgem

-Ben

From r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 16 16:07:13 2009
From: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com (r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:07:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
In-Reply-To: <4A046AEF.1090307@benmabey.com>
References: <49FCAAA6.6040600@yahoo.com> <4A046AEF.1090307@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <187508.72754.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


I finally figured this out.

lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create").should == "anything" }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )

The clue was that I wasn't getting a routing error until I tried to compare route_for() with something.  route_for() seems to generate an object that overrides ==(), and at that time it does raise the exception.  Now we wrap that comparison in a lambda and assert that the *comparison* should raise the expected routing error.

So - great, we can actually test it.  But the syntax does leave something to be desired.  dchelimsky, can you recommend any alternatives that would be a bit cleaner for testing that a route doesn't exist?

Thanks,

Randy




----- Original Message ----
> From: Ben Mabey <ben at benmabey.com>
> To: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com; rspec-users <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 8, 2009 10:25:03 AM
> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> 
> Randy Harmon wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > When upgrading to rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6 gem (from 1.1.12), I'm having
> > a new problem verifying routes that should not exist.
> >
> > This is to support something like this in routes.rb:
> >
> > map.resources :orders do |orders|
> >     orders.resources :items, :except => [:index,:show]
> > end
> >
> > I used to use lambda {}.should_raise( routing error ), but it stopped
> > detecting any raised error.  Requesting it through the browser produces
> > ActionController::MethodNotAllowed (Only post requests are allowed). But
> > that error wasn't detected.
> >
> > When I skip the lambda, and just ask it to verify that the route does
> > exist (which *should* fail), I get the same result for those :except
> > actions as for a made-up action name.  Seems this must have something to
> > do with the change in how route_for delegates back to ActionController's
> > routing assertion (sez the backtrace :).
> >
> >
> > NoMethodError in 'ItemsController route generation should NOT map
> > #indewfefwex'
> > You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
> > You might have expected an instance of Array.
> > The error occurred while evaluating nil.first
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:134:in
> > `recognized_request_for'
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:49:in
> > `assert_recognizes'
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions.rb:54:in
> > `clean_backtrace'
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:47:in
> > `assert_recognizes'
> > ./spec/controllers/thoughts_routing_spec.rb:9:
> >
> >
> > I tried using bypass_rescue in my routing/items_routing_spec.rb file as
> > mentioned by the upgrade doc, but it wasn't valid in the "routing" spec
> > - worked fine when I moved the file back to spec/controllers/, though. 
> > Seems like that's not the issue, but I'm mentioning for more completeness.
> >
> > Any ideas what I should be doing instead, or how I can troubleshoot further?
> >  
> 
> 
> Hmm.. yeah, it seems like it might have to do with how the exceptions 
> are being handled in the newer version of rspec-rials (see 
> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/85-11818-have-mode-for-rails-error-handling).  
> 
> I don't use RSpec to verify my routes very often and have never used it 
> to verify the non-existence of a route so I'm afraid I don't really have 
> any ideas...
> 
> Does anyone else have an idea to do this?
> 
> -Ben


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun 16 16:28:18 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:28:18 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
In-Reply-To: <187508.72754.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <49FCAAA6.6040600@yahoo.com> <4A046AEF.1090307@benmabey.com>
	<187508.72754.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906161328n5db41a0ajc0f4ca43ddb12ef1@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:07 PM, <r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I finally figured this out.
>
> lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create").should == "anything" }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
>
> The clue was that I wasn't getting a routing error until I tried to compare route_for() with something. ?route_for() seems to generate an object that overrides ==(), and at that time it does raise the exception. ?Now we wrap that comparison in a lambda and assert that the *comparison* should raise the expected routing error.
>
> So - great, we can actually test it. ?But the syntax does leave something to be desired. ?dchelimsky, can you recommend any alternatives that would be a bit cleaner for testing that a route doesn't exist?
>

You don't need the .should == "anything" in there. So this is a bit cleaner:

  lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
}.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )

Also, since rspec-1.2.5 you can use expect/to:

  expect { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
}.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )

You could always kick it old-school:

  e = nil
  begin
    route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
  rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
  ensure
    e.should_not be_nil
  end

And you could always wrap this in an new matcher:

def be_routable
  Spec::Matchers.new :be_routable, self do |example|
    match do |params|
      e = nil
      begin
        example.route_for(params)
      rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
      end
      !!e
    end
  end
end

{:controller => "designs", :action => "create"}.should_not be_routable

In this case you need to wrap the matcher's construction in a method
in order to provide access to the scope of the example (which is where
route_for lives). Also, I just whipped that up off the top of my head
- no idea if it actually works :)

HTH,
David




> Thanks,
>
> Randy
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: Ben Mabey <ben at benmabey.com>
>> To: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com; rspec-users <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
>> Sent: Friday, May 8, 2009 10:25:03 AM
>> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
>>
>> Randy Harmon wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > When upgrading to rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6 gem (from 1.1.12), I'm having
>> > a new problem verifying routes that should not exist.
>> >
>> > This is to support something like this in routes.rb:
>> >
>> > map.resources :orders do |orders|
>> > ? ? orders.resources :items, :except => [:index,:show]
>> > end
>> >
>> > I used to use lambda {}.should_raise( routing error ), but it stopped
>> > detecting any raised error. ?Requesting it through the browser produces
>> > ActionController::MethodNotAllowed (Only post requests are allowed). But
>> > that error wasn't detected.
>> >
>> > When I skip the lambda, and just ask it to verify that the route does
>> > exist (which *should* fail), I get the same result for those :except
>> > actions as for a made-up action name. ?Seems this must have something to
>> > do with the change in how route_for delegates back to ActionController's
>> > routing assertion (sez the backtrace :).
>> >
>> >
>> > NoMethodError in 'ItemsController route generation should NOT map
>> > #indewfefwex'
>> > You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
>> > You might have expected an instance of Array.
>> > The error occurred while evaluating nil.first
>> >
>> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:134:in
>> > `recognized_request_for'
>> >
>> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:49:in
>> > `assert_recognizes'
>> >
>> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions.rb:54:in
>> > `clean_backtrace'
>> >
>> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:47:in
>> > `assert_recognizes'
>> > ./spec/controllers/thoughts_routing_spec.rb:9:
>> >
>> >
>> > I tried using bypass_rescue in my routing/items_routing_spec.rb file as
>> > mentioned by the upgrade doc, but it wasn't valid in the "routing" spec
>> > - worked fine when I moved the file back to spec/controllers/, though.
>> > Seems like that's not the issue, but I'm mentioning for more completeness.
>> >
>> > Any ideas what I should be doing instead, or how I can troubleshoot further?
>> >
>>
>>
>> Hmm.. yeah, it seems like it might have to do with how the exceptions
>> are being handled in the newer version of rspec-rials (see
>> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/85-11818-have-mode-for-rails-error-handling).
>>
>> I don't use RSpec to verify my routes very often and have never used it
>> to verify the non-existence of a route so I'm afraid I don't really have
>> any ideas...
>>
>> Does anyone else have an idea to do this?
>>
>> -Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 16 17:14:52 2009
From: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com (r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:14:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906161328n5db41a0ajc0f4ca43ddb12ef1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <49FCAAA6.6040600@yahoo.com> <4A046AEF.1090307@benmabey.com>
	<187508.72754.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<57c63afe0906161328n5db41a0ajc0f4ca43ddb12ef1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <55736.1826.qm@web31804.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


David, thank you for your reply on this.  I really dig the expect { }.to raise_error() syntax!!

To clarify: All the things you're claiming match my expectation.  Unfortunately, my expectation does not match reality according to my tests.

The thing is, route_for([bad stuff]) does not in and of itself raise a routing error.  It constructs an object that hasn't yet been compared with == to anything.  

23   t = route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")

(rdb:1) puts t
#<Spec::Rails::Example::RoutingHelpers::RouteFor:0x208ca44>

According to my tests, the routing error only occurs after route_for()'s result gets compared to something.  So lambda { route_for(...) } does not raise error.

The following code passes with flying colors, either in lambda or expect {}.to form:

    t = route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
    expect { t == "anything" }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
    expect { t.should == "anything" }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )

Any further ideas?

Randy





----- Original Message ----
> From: David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
> To: rspec-users <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 1:28:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> 
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:07 PM, wrote:
> >
> > I finally figured this out.
> >
> > lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create").should == 
> "anything" }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> >
> > The clue was that I wasn't getting a routing error until I tried to compare 
> route_for() with something.  route_for() seems to generate an object that 
> overrides ==(), and at that time it does raise the exception.  Now we wrap that 
> comparison in a lambda and assert that the *comparison* should raise the 
> expected routing error.
> >
> > So - great, we can actually test it.  But the syntax does leave something to 
> be desired.  dchelimsky, can you recommend any alternatives that would be a bit 
> cleaner for testing that a route doesn't exist?
> >
> 
> You don't need the .should == "anything" in there. So this is a bit cleaner:
> 
>   lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> 
> Also, since rspec-1.2.5 you can use expect/to:
> 
>   expect { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> 
> You could always kick it old-school:
> 
>   e = nil
>   begin
>     route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
>   rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
>   ensure
>     e.should_not be_nil
>   end
> 
> And you could always wrap this in an new matcher:
> 
> def be_routable
>   Spec::Matchers.new :be_routable, self do |example|
>     match do |params|
>       e = nil
>       begin
>         example.route_for(params)
>       rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
>       end
>       !!e
>     end
>   end
> end
> 
> {:controller => "designs", :action => "create"}.should_not be_routable
> 
> In this case you need to wrap the matcher's construction in a method
> in order to provide access to the scope of the example (which is where
> route_for lives). Also, I just whipped that up off the top of my head
> - no idea if it actually works :)
> 
> HTH,
> David
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Randy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----
> >> From: Ben Mabey 
> >> To: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com; rspec-users 
> >> Sent: Friday, May 8, 2009 10:25:03 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> >>
> >> Randy Harmon wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > When upgrading to rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6 gem (from 1.1.12), I'm having
> >> > a new problem verifying routes that should not exist.
> >> >
> >> > This is to support something like this in routes.rb:
> >> >
> >> > map.resources :orders do |orders|
> >> >     orders.resources :items, :except => [:index,:show]
> >> > end
> >> >
> >> > I used to use lambda {}.should_raise( routing error ), but it stopped
> >> > detecting any raised error.  Requesting it through the browser produces
> >> > ActionController::MethodNotAllowed (Only post requests are allowed). But
> >> > that error wasn't detected.
> >> >
> >> > When I skip the lambda, and just ask it to verify that the route does
> >> > exist (which *should* fail), I get the same result for those :except
> >> > actions as for a made-up action name.  Seems this must have something to
> >> > do with the change in how route_for delegates back to ActionController's
> >> > routing assertion (sez the backtrace :).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > NoMethodError in 'ItemsController route generation should NOT map
> >> > #indewfefwex'
> >> > You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
> >> > You might have expected an instance of Array.
> >> > The error occurred while evaluating nil.first
> >> >
> >> 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:134:in
> >> > `recognized_request_for'
> >> >
> >> 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:49:in
> >> > `assert_recognizes'
> >> >
> >> 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions.rb:54:in
> >> > `clean_backtrace'
> >> >
> >> 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:47:in
> >> > `assert_recognizes'
> >> > ./spec/controllers/thoughts_routing_spec.rb:9:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I tried using bypass_rescue in my routing/items_routing_spec.rb file as
> >> > mentioned by the upgrade doc, but it wasn't valid in the "routing" spec
> >> > - worked fine when I moved the file back to spec/controllers/, though.
> >> > Seems like that's not the issue, but I'm mentioning for more completeness.
> >> >
> >> > Any ideas what I should be doing instead, or how I can troubleshoot 
> further?
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Hmm.. yeah, it seems like it might have to do with how the exceptions
> >> are being handled in the newer version of rspec-rials (see
> >> 
> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/85-11818-have-mode-for-rails-error-handling).
> >>
> >> I don't use RSpec to verify my routes very often and have never used it
> >> to verify the non-existence of a route so I'm afraid I don't really have
> >> any ideas...
> >>
> >> Does anyone else have an idea to do this?
> >>
> >> -Ben
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> >
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From timcharper at gmail.com  Tue Jun 16 17:11:26 2009
From: timcharper at gmail.com (Tim Harper)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:11:26 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork and Merb and rSpec
In-Reply-To: <4A3724C9.6000104@benmabey.com>
References: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com> 
	<4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>
	<FE6B370A-E045-4EE7-BEE6-8B587200C4C8@cllearview.com> 
	<5D8C3325-5E86-47CC-95DE-F9387C03B2F0@railsnewbie.com>
	<4A3724C9.6000104@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <e1a5e9a00906161411s5fc21402r22bcb68031720b8a@mail.gmail.com>

I'm interested to hear your experience with Spork and Merb.  Right now Spork
is doing some hooks in to rails (that are actually kind of aggressive right
now) to help make spork work more out of the box - specifically, preventing
rails from preloading application models and controllers before the fork
occurs.
Be sure to run spork -d and look to see which files are being preloaded.
Every file listed there will be cached and not reloaded until spork is
restarted.

Tim

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Ben Mabey <ben at benmabey.com> wrote:

> Scott Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 15, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Andy Shipman wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 15 Jun 2009, at 14:43, Scott Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>>  Andy Shipman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When running spork on a merb application, whenever a spec is run I get
>>>>> the following error from the Spork server.
>>>>> /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/merb-core-1.0.11/lib/merb-core/bootloader.rb:1358:
>>>>> [BUG] rb_gc_mark(): unknown data type 0x3c(0x2203d0) non object
>>>>> ruby 1.8.7 (2009-06-08 patchlevel 173) [i686-darwin9]
>>>>>
>>>>> Which crashes the Spork server.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have you tried it on 1.8.6?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have now and it works on 1.8.6. Thanks for the suggestion.
>>>
>>
>> I'd suggest filing a bug on their tracker, wherever it may lie.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>
>
> Spork uses github issues.  Also, FYI, spork has it's own mailing list:
> http://groups.google.com/group/sporkgem
>
> -Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090616/4ed47c5b/attachment.html>

From timcharper at gmail.com  Tue Jun 16 17:11:26 2009
From: timcharper at gmail.com (Tim Harper)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 15:11:26 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork and Merb and rSpec
In-Reply-To: <4A3724C9.6000104@benmabey.com>
References: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com> 
	<4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>
	<FE6B370A-E045-4EE7-BEE6-8B587200C4C8@cllearview.com> 
	<5D8C3325-5E86-47CC-95DE-F9387C03B2F0@railsnewbie.com>
	<4A3724C9.6000104@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <e1a5e9a00906161411s5fc21402r22bcb68031720b8a@mail.gmail.com>

I'm interested to hear your experience with Spork and Merb.  Right now Spork
is doing some hooks in to rails (that are actually kind of aggressive right
now) to help make spork work more out of the box - specifically, preventing
rails from preloading application models and controllers before the fork
occurs.
Be sure to run spork -d and look to see which files are being preloaded.
Every file listed there will be cached and not reloaded until spork is
restarted.

Tim

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 10:51 PM, Ben Mabey <ben at benmabey.com> wrote:

> Scott Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 15, 2009, at 4:11 PM, Andy Shipman wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 15 Jun 2009, at 14:43, Scott Taylor wrote:
>>>
>>>  Andy Shipman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When running spork on a merb application, whenever a spec is run I get
>>>>> the following error from the Spork server.
>>>>> /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/merb-core-1.0.11/lib/merb-core/bootloader.rb:1358:
>>>>> [BUG] rb_gc_mark(): unknown data type 0x3c(0x2203d0) non object
>>>>> ruby 1.8.7 (2009-06-08 patchlevel 173) [i686-darwin9]
>>>>>
>>>>> Which crashes the Spork server.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have you tried it on 1.8.6?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have now and it works on 1.8.6. Thanks for the suggestion.
>>>
>>
>> I'd suggest filing a bug on their tracker, wherever it may lie.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>
>
> Spork uses github issues.  Also, FYI, spork has it's own mailing list:
> http://groups.google.com/group/sporkgem
>
> -Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090616/4ed47c5b/attachment-0001.html>

From r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com  Tue Jun 16 20:23:34 2009
From: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com (r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com)
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 17:23:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
In-Reply-To: <55736.1826.qm@web31804.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <49FCAAA6.6040600@yahoo.com> <4A046AEF.1090307@benmabey.com>
	<187508.72754.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<57c63afe0906161328n5db41a0ajc0f4ca43ddb12ef1@mail.gmail.com>
	<55736.1826.qm@web31804.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <123149.78952.qm@web31815.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


Here's another interesting symptom.  After tracing through the code, I've come to the understanding that the current implementation (delegated to outside rspec, I understand) of route "generation" is not
testing generation at all, but rather is using backward-recognition as a proxy.  Further, that recognition doesn't correspond to what the real router does recognize.

For clarity, here's the background: A resource that requires nesting for new, create; requires
no nesting for edit, update, destroy, and has no index or show.

>  map.resources :designs, :only => [:edit, :update, :destroy]
> map.resources :product, :member => { :redraw => :get } do |product|
>   product.resources :designs, :member => { :set_default =>
:put }, :except => [ :edit, :update, :destroy, :index, :show ]
> end

Okay: when I go to /designs/new in the browser, it borks with a RoutingError.  That's the way I want it to behave, real-world.  Yet, this fails:

> expect { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "new") == "/designs/new" }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )

There's no error raised at all here.  

The following does gripe, but... what it's *really* griping about (in a hidden way) is "bogus path", not about the route_for() params at all.


> expect {  route_for(:controller => "designs", :action
=> "new") == "bogus path" }.to raise_error(
ActionController::RoutingError )

(so if we replace route_for([bad]) with route_for([good]) == "bogus path", then we still get the routing error.


Furthermore, the first one really recognizes the route string (/designs/new), without actually verifying that there is a route in the routing table for it.  So I fear that it's not actually testing what I'm asking it to test.  Taking it out of the expect {} *does* make it barf, but with evidence that something is just plain confused, not that it's actually testing what we're asking it to test:

[wrapping is mine]
> The recognized options <{"action"=>"1", "controller"=>"designs"}> 
> did not match <{"action"=>"show", "id"=>"1", "controller"=>"designs"}>, 
> difference: <{"action"=>"show", "id"=>"1"}>

At the end of the day, what I find is:

* Route generation tests are not testing generation at all, but recognition only
* They're only testing recognition of ideal cases
* Non-existence of routes is currently not testable with rspec

I hoped to just assert something on url_for() - that's the practical application, here.  Does, or does not, url_for() produce a useful result with specific args?  But I see from ActionController::Base how that's not super practical.

I sincerely hope that my understanding is wildly mistaken.  

Sorry if this is a sore spot; I know that this part has been a lot of painful effort so far, far more for others than for myself.  I'll end with an expression of deep and sincere appreciation for this great software.

Randy




----- Original Message ----
> From: "r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com" <r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com>
> To: rspec-users <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 2:14:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> 
> 
> David, thank you for your reply on this.  I really dig the expect { }.to 
> raise_error() syntax!!
> 
> To clarify: All the things you're claiming match my expectation.  Unfortunately, 
> my expectation does not match reality according to my tests.
> 
> The thing is, route_for([bad stuff]) does not in and of itself raise a routing 
> error.  It constructs an object that hasn't yet been compared with == to 
> anything.  
> 
> 23   t = route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> 
> (rdb:1) puts t
> #
> 
> According to my tests, the routing error only occurs after route_for()'s result 
> gets compared to something.  So lambda { route_for(...) } does not raise error.
> 
> The following code passes with flying colors, either in lambda or expect {}.to 
> form:
> 
>     t = route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
>     expect { t == "anything" }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
>     expect { t.should == "anything" }.to raise_error( 
> ActionController::RoutingError )
> 
> Any further ideas?
> 
> Randy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: David Chelimsky 
> > To: rspec-users 
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 1:28:18 PM
> > Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> > 
> > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:07 PM, wrote:
> > >
> > > I finally figured this out.
> > >
> > > lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create").should == 
> > "anything" }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> > >
> > > The clue was that I wasn't getting a routing error until I tried to compare 
> > route_for() with something.  route_for() seems to generate an object that 
> > overrides ==(), and at that time it does raise the exception.  Now we wrap 
> that 
> > comparison in a lambda and assert that the *comparison* should raise the 
> > expected routing error.
> > >
> > > So - great, we can actually test it.  But the syntax does leave something to 
> 
> > be desired.  dchelimsky, can you recommend any alternatives that would be a 
> bit 
> > cleaner for testing that a route doesn't exist?
> > >
> > 
> > You don't need the .should == "anything" in there. So this is a bit cleaner:
> > 
> >   lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> > }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> > 
> > Also, since rspec-1.2.5 you can use expect/to:
> > 
> >   expect { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> > }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> > 
> > You could always kick it old-school:
> > 
> >   e = nil
> >   begin
> >     route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> >   rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
> >   ensure
> >     e.should_not be_nil
> >   end
> > 
> > And you could always wrap this in an new matcher:
> > 
> > def be_routable
> >   Spec::Matchers.new :be_routable, self do |example|
> >     match do |params|
> >       e = nil
> >       begin
> >         example.route_for(params)
> >       rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
> >       end
> >       !!e
> >     end
> >   end
> > end
> > 
> > {:controller => "designs", :action => "create"}.should_not be_routable
> > 
> > In this case you need to wrap the matcher's construction in a method
> > in order to provide access to the scope of the example (which is where
> > route_for lives). Also, I just whipped that up off the top of my head
> > - no idea if it actually works :)
> > 
> > HTH,
> > David
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Randy
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message ----
> > >> From: Ben Mabey 
> > >> To: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com; rspec-users 
> > >> Sent: Friday, May 8, 2009 10:25:03 AM
> > >> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> > >>
> > >> Randy Harmon wrote:
> > >> > Hi,
> > >> >
> > >> > When upgrading to rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6 gem (from 1.1.12), I'm having
> > >> > a new problem verifying routes that should not exist.
> > >> >
> > >> > This is to support something like this in routes.rb:
> > >> >
> > >> > map.resources :orders do |orders|
> > >> >     orders.resources :items, :except => [:index,:show]
> > >> > end
> > >> >
> > >> > I used to use lambda {}.should_raise( routing error ), but it stopped
> > >> > detecting any raised error.  Requesting it through the browser produces
> > >> > ActionController::MethodNotAllowed (Only post requests are allowed). But
> > >> > that error wasn't detected.
> > >> >
> > >> > When I skip the lambda, and just ask it to verify that the route does
> > >> > exist (which *should* fail), I get the same result for those :except
> > >> > actions as for a made-up action name.  Seems this must have something to
> > >> > do with the change in how route_for delegates back to ActionController's
> > >> > routing assertion (sez the backtrace :).
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > NoMethodError in 'ItemsController route generation should NOT map
> > >> > #indewfefwex'
> > >> > You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
> > >> > You might have expected an instance of Array.
> > >> > The error occurred while evaluating nil.first
> > >> >
> > >> 
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:134:in
> > >> > `recognized_request_for'
> > >> >
> > >> 
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:49:in
> > >> > `assert_recognizes'
> > >> >
> > >> 
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions.rb:54:in
> > >> > `clean_backtrace'
> > >> >
> > >> 
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:47:in
> > >> > `assert_recognizes'
> > >> > ./spec/controllers/thoughts_routing_spec.rb:9:
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > I tried using bypass_rescue in my routing/items_routing_spec.rb file as
> > >> > mentioned by the upgrade doc, but it wasn't valid in the "routing" spec
> > >> > - worked fine when I moved the file back to spec/controllers/, though.
> > >> > Seems like that's not the issue, but I'm mentioning for more 
> completeness.
> > >> >
> > >> > Any ideas what I should be doing instead, or how I can troubleshoot 
> > further?
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Hmm.. yeah, it seems like it might have to do with how the exceptions
> > >> are being handled in the newer version of rspec-rials (see
> > >> 
> > 
> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/85-11818-have-mode-for-rails-error-handling).
> > >>
> > >> I don't use RSpec to verify my routes very often and have never used it
> > >> to verify the non-existence of a route so I'm afraid I don't really have
> > >> any ideas...
> > >>
> > >> Does anyone else have an idea to do this?
> > >>
> > >> -Ben
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > rspec-users mailing list
> > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Jun 17 11:21:29 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:21:29 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] shared examples sharing methods
In-Reply-To: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com> wrote:
> Please have a look at
> http://gist.github.com/131277
> What I'd like to do is create a shared_examples group which I can parametize
> a method. So my shared example would perhaps use method named_address=, or
> set_named_address and then groups that behave like "Named address" would be
> able to override this method so it sets the correct address e.g. the last
> billing address

Here's the short version: There's been a lot of discussion on this
list about parameterizing shared examples. Basically, given the
current design it can't happen, and macros are a perfectly good
solution to the problem, so there's not much incentive to change the
design.

I'll try to follow up later with a recommendation about a macro,
unless somebody else beats me to it :)

Cheers,
David


> TIA
> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From matt at mattwynne.net  Wed Jun 17 14:19:39 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 19:19:39 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] shared examples sharing methods
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D6FFC535-6B89-469C-ABD3-D636D8F09D70@mattwynne.net>


On 17 Jun 2009, at 16:21, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> Please have a look at
>> http://gist.github.com/131277
>> What I'd like to do is create a shared_examples group which I can  
>> parametize
>> a method. So my shared example would perhaps use method  
>> named_address=, or
>> set_named_address and then groups that behave like "Named address"  
>> would be
>> able to override this method so it sets the correct address e.g.  
>> the last
>> billing address
>
> Here's the short version: There's been a lot of discussion on this
> list about parameterizing shared examples. Basically, given the
> current design it can't happen, and macros are a perfectly good
> solution to the problem, so there's not much incentive to change the
> design.

You can use instance variables to pass values to the shared examples,  
though, right?

cheers,
Matt Wynne

http://mattwynne.net
+447974 430184


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Jun 17 14:28:00 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:28:00 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] shared examples sharing methods
In-Reply-To: <D6FFC535-6B89-469C-ABD3-D636D8F09D70@mattwynne.net>
References: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>
	<D6FFC535-6B89-469C-ABD3-D636D8F09D70@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906171128u4086d8a6icf25246c3a84ba6@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Matt Wynne<matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>
> On 17 Jun 2009, at 16:21, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Please have a look at
>>> http://gist.github.com/131277
>>> What I'd like to do is create a shared_examples group which I can
>>> parametize
>>> a method. So my shared example would perhaps use method named_address=,
>>> or
>>> set_named_address and then groups that behave like "Named address" would
>>> be
>>> able to override this method so it sets the correct address e.g. the last
>>> billing address
>>
>> Here's the short version: There's been a lot of discussion on this
>> list about parameterizing shared examples. Basically, given the
>> current design it can't happen, and macros are a perfectly good
>> solution to the problem, so there's not much incentive to change the
>> design.
>
> You can use instance variables to pass values to the shared examples,
> though, right?

At your own risk, yes, of course :)

>
> cheers,
> Matt Wynne
>
> http://mattwynne.net
> +447974 430184
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dgoldie15 at gmail.com  Wed Jun 17 15:29:17 2009
From: dgoldie15 at gmail.com (Doug)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:29:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] removing Mocha;
	'spec spec' fails but the specific  model file 	passes
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906131735r36184a03g507859d2acf8c3aa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7c6f7cdb-7c4f-43a9-85df-0f1c45dab029@y34g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906131735r36184a03g507859d2acf8c3aa@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f7f640d0-120d-4ee8-9c7f-1fcac1f3ff01@z14g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>

ok, I investigated further...and I'm still confused.

this is testing a typical authenticate class method......

  # login can be either username or email address
  def self.authenticate(login, pass)
    user = find_by_username(login) || find_by_email(login)
    return user if user && user.matching_password?(pass)
  end

the 2 tests that fail only in spec spec.......
 before :each do
    @user = User.new
  end

  it "should not authenticate bad username" do
    #@user.attributes = valid_user_attributes
    @user = User.create!(valid_user_attributes)
    debugger
    @find_user = User.authenticate('nonexisting', 'secret')
    @find_user.should be_nil
  end

  it "should not authenticate bad password" do
    @user.attributes = valid_user_attributes
    @user.save!
    User.authenticate('joseph', 'badpassword').should be_nil
  end

When you run the specific spec file, it works correctly, i.e. by
executing this class method.
When you run spec spec, it seems to mock the method with mocha (never
passes through this method!)
and returns the fixture object.....which fails the test.

What is the correct way to do this?
... without using config.mock_with :mocha, of course

thanks





On Jun 13, 5:35?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Doug<dgoldi... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I happened to mix ryan bates' authentication scaffold with
> > rspec_scaffold on a ?demo project.
> > and ran into the problem of mixing mock frameworks...ryan uses mocha.
>
> > So, as a learning experience, I choose to redo ryan's tests without
> > mocha but ran into a strange problem with tests of the User model.
>
> > With debugging you can see....
> > If you run just the user_spec.rb file, everything is fine....rspec
> > goes through the User model.
> > However, if you run all the specs, it is somehow still using mocha
> > instead of the User model.
>
> > How is this possible since I removed the configuration for mocha.?
>
> In rails 2.3, activesupport/lib/active_support/test_case.rb requires
> mocha. That's the base class for all of the rails test cases, and
> consequently, rspec example groups as well.
>
>
>
> > In spec_helper.rb, I commented out the ? line: #
> > config.mock_with :mocha
> > I also saw a require 'mocha' statement in test_helper that I removed.
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > 11:41 /c/work/quizmaker_demo (questions)$ spec spec
> > ...................................c:/work/quizmaker_demo/spec/models/
> > user_spec.rb:86
> > User.authenticate('nonexisting', 'secret').should be_nil
> > (rdb:1) s
> > c:/tools/ruby/ruby186/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/mocha-0.9.5/lib/mocha/
> > class_method.rb:40
> > stubbee.__metaclass__.class_eval("def #{method}(*args, &block);
> > mocha.method_missing(:#{method}, *a
> > (rdb:1) c
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-us... at rubyforge.org
> >http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From sfeley at gmail.com  Wed Jun 17 17:36:54 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 17:36:54 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] shared examples sharing methods
In-Reply-To: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906171436q641b6489y97c04231702307b@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 11:14 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com> wrote:
> What I'd like to do is create a shared_examples group which I can parametize
> a method. So my shared example would perhaps use method named_address=, or
> set_named_address and then groups that behave like "Named address" would be
> able to override this method so it sets the correct address e.g. the last
> billing address

This is horrendously ugly, but I was able to achieve something like
what you're talking about using a combination of instance variables
and 'eval' statements in the shared behavior.  See:

http://gist.github.com/131526

Readable and elegant?  Not really.  But I have to set up a crapload of
these classes layered on top of somebody else's SOAP API, and spec
completeness was more important to me than spec maintainability.

(Also, it didn't occur to me to try macros.)  >8->


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com  Wed Jun 17 19:54:15 2009
From: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com (r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
In-Reply-To: <123149.78952.qm@web31815.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <49FCAAA6.6040600@yahoo.com> <4A046AEF.1090307@benmabey.com>
	<187508.72754.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<57c63afe0906161328n5db41a0ajc0f4ca43ddb12ef1@mail.gmail.com>
	<55736.1826.qm@web31804.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<123149.78952.qm@web31815.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <772039.54312.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Okay, after such a harsh analysis of the problem, I figured it was worth digging in just a little bit more.  Side note, some of what I was seeing yesterday was a by-product of having default routes still existing.  But there are still some essential facts that remain, which I present here.

1. The current implementation of route_for().should == "/something" is only consulting route recognition. A more descriptive phrasing of this behavior would be something like 

>   route_recognize("/something").should == { :action ... :controller ... }

2. of course, params_for() was *also* consulting route recognition through a slightly different code path, but eventually using exactly the same test.

Therefore, route generation and recognition are a) redundant and b) incomplete.  


I did dig in more to the problem and spiked out a fairly solid
alternative, which is 100% backward-compatible, plus a bunch.  Here's
my thinking process:

1. If we were to use assert_generates(), it could test that the params result in the specified path, the way implied by the current route_for().should == syntax.  Note, however, that it doesn't verify that the :method arg is correct (if the hash with :path, :method is provided, it actually causes failure).

2. assert_recognizes() does test the method of { :path ... :method  }

Therefore, if we can do both assert_generate() and assert_recognizes(), then we have covered testing a) actual route generation, b) method matching, and c) (bonus result) params_for() matching.  This last is nice, though kind of a hidden benefit that doesn't make itself obvious to the reader of the briefer routing spec.  Fortunately, it's optional - as I said, what I've done is 100% back-compatible.


Also, to support my original goals, some methods (which require catching exceptions that would otherwise be informative) to provide:

1.  Non-routeability tests (:action ... :controller).should_not be_routable

2.  Path-cleanliness and negative method tests 

> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should_not be_post("/path")

Hey, did you catch that?  be_post(), I said.  Well, because it catches exceptions, it's not so useful for positive cases.  So:

42.  A few extra methods that directly test expected positive cases, which can (but don't have to) replace .should == { :path ... :method }

> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should post("/path")
> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should put("/path")
> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should get("/path")
> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should delete("/path")

This gist demonstrates a currently-working example of this method, annotated to introduce things step by step, including the results of my spike that makes it all work.

http://gist.github.com/131569

I hope that this is both more helpful than just my griping of yesterday, and that it adds some value to the project.

Randy



----- Original Message ----
> From: "r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com" <r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com>
> To: rspec-users <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 5:23:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> 
> 
> Here's another interesting symptom.  After tracing through the code, I've come 
> to the understanding that the current implementation (delegated to outside 
> rspec, I understand) of route "generation" is not
> testing generation at all, but rather is using backward-recognition as a proxy.  
> Further, that recognition doesn't correspond to what the real router does 
> recognize.
> 
> For clarity, here's the background: A resource that requires nesting for new, 
> create; requires
> no nesting for edit, update, destroy, and has no index or show.
> 
> >  map.resources :designs, :only => [:edit, :update, :destroy]
> > map.resources :product, :member => { :redraw => :get } do |product|
> >   product.resources :designs, :member => { :set_default =>
> :put }, :except => [ :edit, :update, :destroy, :index, :show ]
> > end
> 
> Okay: when I go to /designs/new in the browser, it borks with a RoutingError.  
> That's the way I want it to behave, real-world.  Yet, this fails:
> 
> > expect { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "new") == 
> "/designs/new" }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> 
> There's no error raised at all here.  
> 
> The following does gripe, but... what it's *really* griping about (in a hidden 
> way) is "bogus path", not about the route_for() params at all.
> 
> 
> > expect {  route_for(:controller => "designs", :action
> => "new") == "bogus path" }.to raise_error(
> ActionController::RoutingError )
> 
> (so if we replace route_for([bad]) with route_for([good]) == "bogus path", then 
> we still get the routing error.
> 
> 
> Furthermore, the first one really recognizes the route string (/designs/new), 
> without actually verifying that there is a route in the routing table for it.  
> So I fear that it's not actually testing what I'm asking it to test.  Taking it 
> out of the expect {} *does* make it barf, but with evidence that something is 
> just plain confused, not that it's actually testing what we're asking it to 
> test:
> 
> [wrapping is mine]
> > The recognized options <{"action"=>"1", "controller"=>"designs"}> 
> > did not match <{"action"=>"show", "id"=>"1", "controller"=>"designs"}>, 
> > difference: <{"action"=>"show", "id"=>"1"}>
> 
> At the end of the day, what I find is:
> 
> * Route generation tests are not testing generation at all, but recognition only
> * They're only testing recognition of ideal cases
> * Non-existence of routes is currently not testable with rspec
> 
> I hoped to just assert something on url_for() - that's the practical 
> application, here.  Does, or does not, url_for() produce a useful result with 
> specific args?  But I see from ActionController::Base how that's not super 
> practical.
> 
> I sincerely hope that my understanding is wildly mistaken.  
> 
> Sorry if this is a sore spot; I know that this part has been a lot of painful 
> effort so far, far more for others than for myself.  I'll end with an expression 
> of deep and sincere appreciation for this great software.
> 
> Randy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: "r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com" 
> > To: rspec-users 
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 2:14:52 PM
> > Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> > 
> > 
> > David, thank you for your reply on this.  I really dig the expect { }.to 
> > raise_error() syntax!!
> > 
> > To clarify: All the things you're claiming match my expectation.  
> Unfortunately, 
> > my expectation does not match reality according to my tests.
> > 
> > The thing is, route_for([bad stuff]) does not in and of itself raise a routing 
> 
> > error.  It constructs an object that hasn't yet been compared with == to 
> > anything.  
> > 
> > 23   t = route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> > 
> > (rdb:1) puts t
> > #
> > 
> > According to my tests, the routing error only occurs after route_for()'s 
> result 
> > gets compared to something.  So lambda { route_for(...) } does not raise 
> error.
> > 
> > The following code passes with flying colors, either in lambda or expect {}.to 
> 
> > form:
> > 
> >     t = route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> >     expect { t == "anything" }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError 
> )
> >     expect { t.should == "anything" }.to raise_error( 
> > ActionController::RoutingError )
> > 
> > Any further ideas?
> > 
> > Randy
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original Message ----
> > > From: David Chelimsky 
> > > To: rspec-users 
> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 1:28:18 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:07 PM, wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I finally figured this out.
> > > >
> > > > lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create").should 
> == 
> > > "anything" }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> > > >
> > > > The clue was that I wasn't getting a routing error until I tried to 
> compare 
> > > route_for() with something.  route_for() seems to generate an object that 
> > > overrides ==(), and at that time it does raise the exception.  Now we wrap 
> > that 
> > > comparison in a lambda and assert that the *comparison* should raise the 
> > > expected routing error.
> > > >
> > > > So - great, we can actually test it.  But the syntax does leave something 
> to 
> > 
> > > be desired.  dchelimsky, can you recommend any alternatives that would be a 
> > bit 
> > > cleaner for testing that a route doesn't exist?
> > > >
> > > 
> > > You don't need the .should == "anything" in there. So this is a bit cleaner:
> > > 
> > >   lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> > > }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> > > 
> > > Also, since rspec-1.2.5 you can use expect/to:
> > > 
> > >   expect { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> > > }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
> > > 
> > > You could always kick it old-school:
> > > 
> > >   e = nil
> > >   begin
> > >     route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
> > >   rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
> > >   ensure
> > >     e.should_not be_nil
> > >   end
> > > 
> > > And you could always wrap this in an new matcher:
> > > 
> > > def be_routable
> > >   Spec::Matchers.new :be_routable, self do |example|
> > >     match do |params|
> > >       e = nil
> > >       begin
> > >         example.route_for(params)
> > >       rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
> > >       end
> > >       !!e
> > >     end
> > >   end
> > > end
> > > 
> > > {:controller => "designs", :action => "create"}.should_not be_routable
> > > 
> > > In this case you need to wrap the matcher's construction in a method
> > > in order to provide access to the scope of the example (which is where
> > > route_for lives). Also, I just whipped that up off the top of my head
> > > - no idea if it actually works :)
> > > 
> > > HTH,
> > > David
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > Randy
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message ----
> > > >> From: Ben Mabey 
> > > >> To: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com; rspec-users 
> > > >> Sent: Friday, May 8, 2009 10:25:03 AM
> > > >> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
> > > >>
> > > >> Randy Harmon wrote:
> > > >> > Hi,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > When upgrading to rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6 gem (from 1.1.12), I'm having
> > > >> > a new problem verifying routes that should not exist.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > This is to support something like this in routes.rb:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > map.resources :orders do |orders|
> > > >> >     orders.resources :items, :except => [:index,:show]
> > > >> > end
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I used to use lambda {}.should_raise( routing error ), but it stopped
> > > >> > detecting any raised error.  Requesting it through the browser produces
> > > >> > ActionController::MethodNotAllowed (Only post requests are allowed). 
> But
> > > >> > that error wasn't detected.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > When I skip the lambda, and just ask it to verify that the route does
> > > >> > exist (which *should* fail), I get the same result for those :except
> > > >> > actions as for a made-up action name.  Seems this must have something 
> to
> > > >> > do with the change in how route_for delegates back to 
> ActionController's
> > > >> > routing assertion (sez the backtrace :).
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > NoMethodError in 'ItemsController route generation should NOT map
> > > >> > #indewfefwex'
> > > >> > You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
> > > >> > You might have expected an instance of Array.
> > > >> > The error occurred while evaluating nil.first
> > > >> >
> > > >> 
> > > 
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:134:in
> > > >> > `recognized_request_for'
> > > >> >
> > > >> 
> > > 
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:49:in
> > > >> > `assert_recognizes'
> > > >> >
> > > >> 
> > > 
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions.rb:54:in
> > > >> > `clean_backtrace'
> > > >> >
> > > >> 
> > > 
> > 
> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:47:in
> > > >> > `assert_recognizes'
> > > >> > ./spec/controllers/thoughts_routing_spec.rb:9:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I tried using bypass_rescue in my routing/items_routing_spec.rb file as
> > > >> > mentioned by the upgrade doc, but it wasn't valid in the "routing" spec
> > > >> > - worked fine when I moved the file back to spec/controllers/, though.
> > > >> > Seems like that's not the issue, but I'm mentioning for more 
> > completeness.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Any ideas what I should be doing instead, or how I can troubleshoot 
> > > further?
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Hmm.. yeah, it seems like it might have to do with how the exceptions
> > > >> are being handled in the newer version of rspec-rials (see
> > > >> 
> > > 
> > 
> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/85-11818-have-mode-for-rails-error-handling).
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't use RSpec to verify my routes very often and have never used it
> > > >> to verify the non-existence of a route so I'm afraid I don't really have
> > > >> any ideas...
> > > >>
> > > >> Does anyone else have an idea to do this?
> > > >>
> > > >> -Ben
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > rspec-users mailing list
> > > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > rspec-users mailing list
> > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Jun 17 23:30:47 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:30:47 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
In-Reply-To: <772039.54312.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <49FCAAA6.6040600@yahoo.com> <4A046AEF.1090307@benmabey.com>
	<187508.72754.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<57c63afe0906161328n5db41a0ajc0f4ca43ddb12ef1@mail.gmail.com>
	<55736.1826.qm@web31804.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<123149.78952.qm@web31815.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<772039.54312.qm@web31806.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906172030l10e8a8a4pf269e7df5810b4e@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:54 PM, <r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Okay, after such a harsh analysis of the problem, I figured it was worth digging in just a little bit more. ?Side note, some of what I was seeing yesterday was a by-product of having default routes still existing. ?But there are still some essential facts that remain, which I present here.
>
> 1. The current implementation of route_for().should == "/something" is only consulting route recognition. A more descriptive phrasing of this behavior would be something like
>
>> ? route_recognize("/something").should == { :action ... :controller ... }
>
> 2. of course, params_for() was *also* consulting route recognition through a slightly different code path, but eventually using exactly the same test.
>
> Therefore, route generation and recognition are a) redundant and b) incomplete.
>
>
> I did dig in more to the problem and spiked out a fairly solid
> alternative, which is 100% backward-compatible, plus a bunch. ?Here's
> my thinking process:
>
> 1. If we were to use assert_generates(), it could test that the params result in the specified path, the way implied by the current route_for().should == syntax. ?Note, however, that it doesn't verify that the :method arg is correct (if the hash with :path, :method is provided, it actually causes failure).
>
> 2. assert_recognizes() does test the method of { :path ... :method ?}
>
> Therefore, if we can do both assert_generate() and assert_recognizes(), then we have covered testing a) actual route generation, b) method matching, and c) (bonus result) params_for() matching. ?This last is nice, though kind of a hidden benefit that doesn't make itself obvious to the reader of the briefer routing spec. ?Fortunately, it's optional - as I said, what I've done is 100% back-compatible.
>
>
> Also, to support my original goals, some methods (which require catching exceptions that would otherwise be informative) to provide:
>
> 1. ?Non-routeability tests (:action ... :controller).should_not be_routable
>
> 2. ?Path-cleanliness and negative method tests
>
>> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should_not be_post("/path")
>
> Hey, did you catch that? ?be_post(), I said. ?Well, because it catches exceptions, it's not so useful for positive cases. ?So:
>
> 42. ?A few extra methods that directly test expected positive cases, which can (but don't have to) replace .should == { :path ... :method }
>
>> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should post("/path")
>> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should put("/path")
>> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should get("/path")
>> route_for(:action ... :controller ... :args ).should delete("/path")
>
> This gist demonstrates a currently-working example of this method, annotated to introduce things step by step, including the results of my spike that makes it all work.
>
> http://gist.github.com/131569
>
> I hope that this is both more helpful than just my griping of yesterday, and that it adds some value to the project.

This is all good stuff Randy. Thanks.

Wanna make it a lighthouse ticket with patch? We can talk about the
get/put/post/delete-ish methods there.

Cheers,
David

>
> Randy
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
>> From: "r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com" <r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com>
>> To: rspec-users <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 5:23:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
>>
>>
>> Here's another interesting symptom. ?After tracing through the code, I've come
>> to the understanding that the current implementation (delegated to outside
>> rspec, I understand) of route "generation" is not
>> testing generation at all, but rather is using backward-recognition as a proxy.
>> Further, that recognition doesn't correspond to what the real router does
>> recognize.
>>
>> For clarity, here's the background: A resource that requires nesting for new,
>> create; requires
>> no nesting for edit, update, destroy, and has no index or show.
>>
>> > ?map.resources :designs, :only => [:edit, :update, :destroy]
>> > map.resources :product, :member => { :redraw => :get } do |product|
>> > ? product.resources :designs, :member => { :set_default =>
>> :put }, :except => [ :edit, :update, :destroy, :index, :show ]
>> > end
>>
>> Okay: when I go to /designs/new in the browser, it borks with a RoutingError.
>> That's the way I want it to behave, real-world. ?Yet, this fails:
>>
>> > expect { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "new") ==
>> "/designs/new" }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
>>
>> There's no error raised at all here.
>>
>> The following does gripe, but... what it's *really* griping about (in a hidden
>> way) is "bogus path", not about the route_for() params at all.
>>
>>
>> > expect { ?route_for(:controller => "designs", :action
>> => "new") == "bogus path" }.to raise_error(
>> ActionController::RoutingError )
>>
>> (so if we replace route_for([bad]) with route_for([good]) == "bogus path", then
>> we still get the routing error.
>>
>>
>> Furthermore, the first one really recognizes the route string (/designs/new),
>> without actually verifying that there is a route in the routing table for it.
>> So I fear that it's not actually testing what I'm asking it to test. ?Taking it
>> out of the expect {} *does* make it barf, but with evidence that something is
>> just plain confused, not that it's actually testing what we're asking it to
>> test:
>>
>> [wrapping is mine]
>> > The recognized options <{"action"=>"1", "controller"=>"designs"}>
>> > did not match <{"action"=>"show", "id"=>"1", "controller"=>"designs"}>,
>> > difference: <{"action"=>"show", "id"=>"1"}>
>>
>> At the end of the day, what I find is:
>>
>> * Route generation tests are not testing generation at all, but recognition only
>> * They're only testing recognition of ideal cases
>> * Non-existence of routes is currently not testable with rspec
>>
>> I hoped to just assert something on url_for() - that's the practical
>> application, here. ?Does, or does not, url_for() produce a useful result with
>> specific args? ?But I see from ActionController::Base how that's not super
>> practical.
>>
>> I sincerely hope that my understanding is wildly mistaken.
>>
>> Sorry if this is a sore spot; I know that this part has been a lot of painful
>> effort so far, far more for others than for myself. ?I'll end with an expression
>> of deep and sincere appreciation for this great software.
>>
>> Randy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----
>> > From: "r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com"
>> > To: rspec-users
>> > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 2:14:52 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
>> >
>> >
>> > David, thank you for your reply on this. ?I really dig the expect { }.to
>> > raise_error() syntax!!
>> >
>> > To clarify: All the things you're claiming match my expectation.
>> Unfortunately,
>> > my expectation does not match reality according to my tests.
>> >
>> > The thing is, route_for([bad stuff]) does not in and of itself raise a routing
>>
>> > error. ?It constructs an object that hasn't yet been compared with == to
>> > anything.
>> >
>> > 23 ? t = route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
>> >
>> > (rdb:1) puts t
>> > #
>> >
>> > According to my tests, the routing error only occurs after route_for()'s
>> result
>> > gets compared to something. ?So lambda { route_for(...) } does not raise
>> error.
>> >
>> > The following code passes with flying colors, either in lambda or expect {}.to
>>
>> > form:
>> >
>> > ? ? t = route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
>> > ? ? expect { t == "anything" }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError
>> )
>> > ? ? expect { t.should == "anything" }.to raise_error(
>> > ActionController::RoutingError )
>> >
>> > Any further ideas?
>> >
>> > Randy
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message ----
>> > > From: David Chelimsky
>> > > To: rspec-users
>> > > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 1:28:18 PM
>> > > Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 3:07 PM, wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I finally figured this out.
>> > > >
>> > > > lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create").should
>> ==
>> > > "anything" }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
>> > > >
>> > > > The clue was that I wasn't getting a routing error until I tried to
>> compare
>> > > route_for() with something. ?route_for() seems to generate an object that
>> > > overrides ==(), and at that time it does raise the exception. ?Now we wrap
>> > that
>> > > comparison in a lambda and assert that the *comparison* should raise the
>> > > expected routing error.
>> > > >
>> > > > So - great, we can actually test it. ?But the syntax does leave something
>> to
>> >
>> > > be desired. ?dchelimsky, can you recommend any alternatives that would be a
>> > bit
>> > > cleaner for testing that a route doesn't exist?
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > You don't need the .should == "anything" in there. So this is a bit cleaner:
>> > >
>> > > ? lambda { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
>> > > }.should raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
>> > >
>> > > Also, since rspec-1.2.5 you can use expect/to:
>> > >
>> > > ? expect { route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
>> > > }.to raise_error( ActionController::RoutingError )
>> > >
>> > > You could always kick it old-school:
>> > >
>> > > ? e = nil
>> > > ? begin
>> > > ? ? route_for(:controller => "designs", :action => "create")
>> > > ? rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
>> > > ? ensure
>> > > ? ? e.should_not be_nil
>> > > ? end
>> > >
>> > > And you could always wrap this in an new matcher:
>> > >
>> > > def be_routable
>> > > ? Spec::Matchers.new :be_routable, self do |example|
>> > > ? ? match do |params|
>> > > ? ? ? e = nil
>> > > ? ? ? begin
>> > > ? ? ? ? example.route_for(params)
>> > > ? ? ? rescue ActionController::RoutingError => e
>> > > ? ? ? end
>> > > ? ? ? !!e
>> > > ? ? end
>> > > ? end
>> > > end
>> > >
>> > > {:controller => "designs", :action => "create"}.should_not be_routable
>> > >
>> > > In this case you need to wrap the matcher's construction in a method
>> > > in order to provide access to the scope of the example (which is where
>> > > route_for lives). Also, I just whipped that up off the top of my head
>> > > - no idea if it actually works :)
>> > >
>> > > HTH,
>> > > David
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > >
>> > > > Randy
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > ----- Original Message ----
>> > > >> From: Ben Mabey
>> > > >> To: r_j_h_box-sf at yahoo.com; rspec-users
>> > > >> Sent: Friday, May 8, 2009 10:25:03 AM
>> > > >> Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Problem verifying routing error
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Randy Harmon wrote:
>> > > >> > Hi,
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > When upgrading to rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6 gem (from 1.1.12), I'm having
>> > > >> > a new problem verifying routes that should not exist.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > This is to support something like this in routes.rb:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > map.resources :orders do |orders|
>> > > >> > ? ? orders.resources :items, :except => [:index,:show]
>> > > >> > end
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > I used to use lambda {}.should_raise( routing error ), but it stopped
>> > > >> > detecting any raised error. ?Requesting it through the browser produces
>> > > >> > ActionController::MethodNotAllowed (Only post requests are allowed).
>> But
>> > > >> > that error wasn't detected.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > When I skip the lambda, and just ask it to verify that the route does
>> > > >> > exist (which *should* fail), I get the same result for those :except
>> > > >> > actions as for a made-up action name. ?Seems this must have something
>> to
>> > > >> > do with the change in how route_for delegates back to
>> ActionController's
>> > > >> > routing assertion (sez the backtrace :).
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > NoMethodError in 'ItemsController route generation should NOT map
>> > > >> > #indewfefwex'
>> > > >> > You have a nil object when you didn't expect it!
>> > > >> > You might have expected an instance of Array.
>> > > >> > The error occurred while evaluating nil.first
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:134:in
>> > > >> > `recognized_request_for'
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:49:in
>> > > >> > `assert_recognizes'
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions.rb:54:in
>> > > >> > `clean_backtrace'
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.2.2/lib/action_controller/assertions/routing_assertions.rb:47:in
>> > > >> > `assert_recognizes'
>> > > >> > ./spec/controllers/thoughts_routing_spec.rb:9:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > I tried using bypass_rescue in my routing/items_routing_spec.rb file as
>> > > >> > mentioned by the upgrade doc, but it wasn't valid in the "routing" spec
>> > > >> > - worked fine when I moved the file back to spec/controllers/, though.
>> > > >> > Seems like that's not the issue, but I'm mentioning for more
>> > completeness.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > Any ideas what I should be doing instead, or how I can troubleshoot
>> > > further?
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Hmm.. yeah, it seems like it might have to do with how the exceptions
>> > > >> are being handled in the newer version of rspec-rials (see
>> > > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/85-11818-have-mode-for-rails-error-handling).
>> > > >>
>> > > >> I don't use RSpec to verify my routes very often and have never used it
>> > > >> to verify the non-existence of a route so I'm afraid I don't really have
>> > > >> any ideas...
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Does anyone else have an idea to do this?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> -Ben
>> > > >
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > rspec-users mailing list
>> > > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> > > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>> > > >
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > rspec-users mailing list
>> > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rspec-users mailing list
>> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From ben at benmabey.com  Thu Jun 18 00:17:29 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 22:17:29 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] shared examples sharing methods
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906171128u4086d8a6icf25246c3a84ba6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>	<57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>	<D6FFC535-6B89-469C-ABD3-D636D8F09D70@mattwynne.net>
	<57c63afe0906171128u4086d8a6icf25246c3a84ba6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A39BFD9.4070205@benmabey.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Matt Wynne<matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>   
>> On 17 Jun 2009, at 16:21, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Please have a look at
>>>> http://gist.github.com/131277
>>>> What I'd like to do is create a shared_examples group which I can
>>>> parametize
>>>> a method. So my shared example would perhaps use method named_address=,
>>>> or
>>>> set_named_address and then groups that behave like "Named address" would
>>>> be
>>>> able to override this method so it sets the correct address e.g. the last
>>>> billing address
>>>>         
>>> Here's the short version: There's been a lot of discussion on this
>>> list about parameterizing shared examples. Basically, given the
>>> current design it can't happen, and macros are a perfectly good
>>> solution to the problem, so there's not much incentive to change the
>>> design.
>>>       
>> You can use instance variables to pass values to the shared examples,
>> though, right?
>>     
>
> At your own risk, yes, of course :)
>   

If you do go down that route, I recommend method calls instead of 
instance variables.  That way it will yell out you when you forget to 
define one. :)

-Ben
>   
>> cheers,
>> Matt Wynne
>>
>> http://mattwynne.net
>> +447974 430184
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>   


From sfeley at gmail.com  Thu Jun 18 00:36:17 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:36:17 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] shared examples sharing methods
In-Reply-To: <4A39BFD9.4070205@benmabey.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>
	<D6FFC535-6B89-469C-ABD3-D636D8F09D70@mattwynne.net>
	<57c63afe0906171128u4086d8a6icf25246c3a84ba6@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A39BFD9.4070205@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906172136t137d8adeja823bde526d8dff6@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:17 AM, Ben Mabey<ben at benmabey.com> wrote:
>
> If you do go down that route, I recommend method calls instead of instance
> variables. ?That way it will yell out you when you forget to define one. :)

Hey, instance variables do that too.  Yelling == "my tests fail."  >8->

(And if they don't, I'm *really* doing something wrong...)


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From godfoca at gmail.com  Thu Jun 18 01:04:22 2009
From: godfoca at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nicol=E1s_Sanguinetti?=)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:04:22 -0300
Subject: [rspec-users] shared examples sharing methods
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906172136t137d8adeja823bde526d8dff6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>
	<D6FFC535-6B89-469C-ABD3-D636D8F09D70@mattwynne.net>
	<57c63afe0906171128u4086d8a6icf25246c3a84ba6@mail.gmail.com>
	<4A39BFD9.4070205@benmabey.com>
	<1fb4df0906172136t137d8adeja823bde526d8dff6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e30c8b940906172204h6d390443y278b85a52b8f526@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 1:36 AM, Stephen Eley<sfeley at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:17 AM, Ben Mabey<ben at benmabey.com> wrote:
>>
>> If you do go down that route, I recommend method calls instead of instance
>> variables. ?That way it will yell out you when you forget to define one. :)
>
> Hey, instance variables do that too. ?Yelling == "my tests fail." ?>8->
>
> (And if they don't, I'm *really* doing something wrong...)

But methods are more explicit. Suppose you want to parametrize on the
value of a certain property named "bar". Not defining  @bar will raise
an NoMethodError because you called something on nil. Not defining the
method will raise a NoMethodError because bar isn't defined, which
tells you immediately what you need to solve.

You could also do something like

def bar
  raise NotImplementedError, "please define this method in each of
your example groups that use this shared behavior"
end

and it will be even more explicit. *But* this means you have to define
the method *after* you include the shared examples, or it will fail
(which is a code smell, IMO).

-foca

>
>
> --
> Have Fun,
> ? Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
> ? ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
> ? http://www.escapepod.org
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From ben at benmabey.com  Thu Jun 18 01:14:25 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:14:25 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] shared examples sharing methods
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906170814h18ecbd50h86486c1089fb75d@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906170821t4258666scd390318884b233@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A39CD31.3080301@benmabey.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Please have a look at
>> http://gist.github.com/131277
>> What I'd like to do is create a shared_examples group which I can parametize
>> a method. So my shared example would perhaps use method named_address=, or
>> set_named_address and then groups that behave like "Named address" would be
>> able to override this method so it sets the correct address e.g. the last
>> billing address
>>     
>
> Here's the short version: There's been a lot of discussion on this
> list about parameterizing shared examples. Basically, given the
> current design it can't happen, and macros are a perfectly good
> solution to the problem, so there's not much incentive to change the
> design.
>
> I'll try to follow up later with a recommendation about a macro,
> unless somebody else beats me to it :)
>   

I beat David to it. :)  Here are some options:

http://gist.github.com/131701

I think I like  #7 and #8 the best with the eval and #subject use.  With 
#8 I intentionally modify the backtrace so that the when errors happen 
it points to where the macro was called, not defined.  Sometimes this is 
desirable, YMMV.  FWIW, I question the value of such specs... but that 
is the macro approach.

-Ben


From bkocik at gmail.com  Thu Jun 18 11:57:24 2009
From: bkocik at gmail.com (Bill Kocik)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:57:24 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <86BE0CC1-0FEC-4FE7-9407-62D440BD1806@ultrasaurus.com>
References: <86BE0CC1-0FEC-4FE7-9407-62D440BD1806@ultrasaurus.com>
Message-ID: <310c80f00906180857r300fedc1w6dc12f0de93acdeb@mail.gmail.com>

Just to add a couple cents in...

I've been working as either a sysadmin or software developer for the
last 10 years (software development pretty much exclusively for the
last 5 or 6). I started picking up Rails about 2 years ago, and though
I was always aware of TDD - and even occasionally dabbled in it - I
never really embraced it. Not because I didn't see its importance, but
because the barrier to entry always seemed too high, and schedules
never allowed for it (as a friend of mine is fond of saying, "You mean
we don't have time to do it right, but we have time to do it over and
over again?").

Right now I'm working on a personal project for which I have no QA
team to watch my back, so instead I'm doggedly using top-down BDD with
Cucumber (and unit tests) to help keep me in line. I think the biggest
hurdle to learning it is this: Pretty much all the tutorials and docs
written on the topic center around some simple example app that's easy
to test. But in the real world, software is messy, and tends to resist
being tested. I know the traditional counter argument is that this
means your design is flawed, but that isn't always true. One of the
biggest challenges I faced was how to test authentication in my
application, in which users sign in using their Twitter credentials
via OAuth[1]. Another was in testing my own endpoints that create JSON
that's rendered via JS in the browser[2]. Maybe Selenium could have
helped here, but creating tests in general was already slowing me to
the point that I'm a good deal behind schedule, and I couldn't take
another day or so to learn how to use Selenium with the risk that it
might not really suit my situation for one reason or another - because
software is messy.

One that I haven't tackled yet but will have to soon is how to test
code that runs as a BackgrounDRb worker.

I came up with solutions for all of this (except for the BDRb stuff),
but I'm not entirely sure of their quality. They certainly feel
hackish, but I can't put my finger on why. I suspect David Chelimsky
or Ben Mabey or Aslak or any of a hundred or more other people could
have come up with beautiful, elegant solutions to the challenges I
faced, but since none of them were standing over my shoulder I have no
way of knowing, and none of this is covered in the
write-a-blog-in-10-minutes Rails demo.

That has been my challenge in learning and using BDD.


[1] My solution: http://tr.im/oW8y
[2] I defined these two custom steps (JSON_CALLBACK is defined as the
:callback arg I pass in my 'render :json' calls - but it will trip the
JSON parser if its there):

Then /^I should get valid JSON$/ do
  assert_nothing_raised do
    assert JSON.parse(@response.body.gsub(/^#{JSON_CALLBACK}\((.*)\)/, '\1'))
  end
end

Then /^I should find "(.+)" in JSON/ do |xpath|
  json_hash = JSON.parse(@response.body.gsub(/^#{JSON_CALLBACK}\((.*)\)/, '\1'))
  xmldoc = Nokogiri::XML(json_hash.to_xml)
  xpath.gsub!('_', '-') # in XML, underscores will be dashes.
  xpath = "./hash" + xpath unless xpath =~ /^\/\//
  assert !xmldoc.xpath(xpath).blank?
end

--
Bill Kocik

http://bkocik.net

From ben at benmabey.com  Thu Jun 18 13:36:25 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 11:36:25 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <310c80f00906180857r300fedc1w6dc12f0de93acdeb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <86BE0CC1-0FEC-4FE7-9407-62D440BD1806@ultrasaurus.com>
	<310c80f00906180857r300fedc1w6dc12f0de93acdeb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A3A7B19.2060609@benmabey.com>

Bill Kocik wrote:
> Just to add a couple cents in...
>
> I've been working as either a sysadmin or software developer for the
> last 10 years (software development pretty much exclusively for the
> last 5 or 6). I started picking up Rails about 2 years ago, and though
> I was always aware of TDD - and even occasionally dabbled in it - I
> never really embraced it. Not because I didn't see its importance, but
> because the barrier to entry always seemed too high, and schedules
> never allowed for it (as a friend of mine is fond of saying, "You mean
> we don't have time to do it right, but we have time to do it over and
> over again?").
>
> Right now I'm working on a personal project for which I have no QA
> team to watch my back, so instead I'm doggedly using top-down BDD with
> Cucumber (and unit tests) to help keep me in line. I think the biggest
> hurdle to learning it is this: Pretty much all the tutorials and docs
> written on the topic center around some simple example app that's easy
> to test. But in the real world, software is messy, and tends to resist
> being tested. I know the traditional counter argument is that this
> means your design is flawed, but that isn't always true. One of the
> biggest challenges I faced was how to test authentication in my
> application, in which users sign in using their Twitter credentials
> via OAuth[1]. Another was in testing my own endpoints that create JSON
> that's rendered via JS in the browser[2]. Maybe Selenium could have
> helped here, but creating tests in general was already slowing me to
> the point that I'm a good deal behind schedule, and I couldn't take
> another day or so to learn how to use Selenium with the risk that it
> might not really suit my situation for one reason or another - because
> software is messy.
>
> One that I haven't tackled yet but will have to soon is how to test
> code that runs as a BackgrounDRb worker.
>
> I came up with solutions for all of this (except for the BDRb stuff),
> but I'm not entirely sure of their quality. They certainly feel
> hackish, but I can't put my finger on why. I suspect David Chelimsky
> or Ben Mabey or Aslak or any of a hundred or more other people could
> have come up with beautiful, elegant solutions
I'm flattered, but FWIW I am always struggling on how best to test 
things as well.  In cases like you are describing it seems like testing 
it is often harder than the actual implementation.  Making those tests 
valuable without being too brittle can be challenging.

>  to the challenges I
> faced, but since none of them were standing over my shoulder I have no
> way of knowing, and none of this is covered in the
> write-a-blog-in-10-minutes Rails demo.
>
> That has been my challenge in learning and using BDD.
Thanks for sharing Bill.  I totally understand where you are coming 
from.  IME, it is hard when writing a tutorial or giving a presentation 
to not teach to the least common denominator in the audience (the 
beginner).  Time constraints usually set in too that don't allow you to 
do more advanced topics that would require more explanation.  Thats why 
for most presentations I try to focus more on the process and ideas 
rather than the example and tools (i.e stuff you can't learn from a wiki 
so easily).  I do see your point however.  I often feel frustrated in 
other presentations at the simplicity of examples given and wish for 
more in-depth and challenging examples.  Your point is noted: a good 
tutorial app for BDD should involve harder to test components (web 
services, asynchronous messaging/processing, caching, etc) since this is 
what pops up in real projects.
>
> [1] My solution: http://tr.im/oW8y
>   
This is more or less how I would of done this with Cucumber.  And you 
were complaining about no advanced tutorials. ;)  Nice writeup.

> [2] I defined these two custom steps (JSON_CALLBACK is defined as the
> :callback arg I pass in my 'render :json' calls - but it will trip the
> JSON parser if its there):
>
> Then /^I should get valid JSON$/ do
>   assert_nothing_raised do
>     assert JSON.parse(@response.body.gsub(/^#{JSON_CALLBACK}\((.*)\)/, '\1'))
>   end
> end
>
> Then /^I should find "(.+)" in JSON/ do |xpath|
>   json_hash = JSON.parse(@response.body.gsub(/^#{JSON_CALLBACK}\((.*)\)/, '\1'))
>   xmldoc = Nokogiri::XML(json_hash.to_xml)
>   xpath.gsub!('_', '-') # in XML, underscores will be dashes.
>   xpath = "./hash" + xpath unless xpath =~ /^\/\//
>   assert !xmldoc.xpath(xpath).blank?
> end
>   

I probably would of done this in RSpec instead of Cucumber.  Then I 
would manually tested in a browser.. since you are going to want to do 
that anyways.  I take this stance quite a bit as I feel adding Selenium 
(or another automated browser solution) can potentially add much more of 
a maintenance burden than webrat in :rails mode.

Thanks,
Ben

From bkocik at gmail.com  Thu Jun 18 14:05:40 2009
From: bkocik at gmail.com (Bill Kocik)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:05:40 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <4A3A7B19.2060609@benmabey.com>
References: <86BE0CC1-0FEC-4FE7-9407-62D440BD1806@ultrasaurus.com> 
	<310c80f00906180857r300fedc1w6dc12f0de93acdeb@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A3A7B19.2060609@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <310c80f00906181105j4f48c4b3h7dcf3270c6ec42e6@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks for the encouragement, Ben. :)


On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Ben Mabey <ben at benmabey.com> wrote:

>> Then /^I should find "(.+)" in JSON/ do |xpath|
>> ?json_hash = JSON.parse(@response.body.gsub(/^#{JSON_CALLBACK}\((.*)\)/, '\1'))
>> ?xmldoc = Nokogiri::XML(json_hash.to_xml)
>> ?xpath.gsub!('_', '-') # in XML, underscores will be dashes.
>> ?xpath = "./hash" + xpath unless xpath =~ /^\/\//
>> ?assert !xmldoc.xpath(xpath).blank?
>> end
>>
>
> I probably would of done this in RSpec instead of Cucumber. ?Then I would manually tested in a browser.. since you are going to want to do that anyways. ?I take this stance quite a bit as I feel adding Selenium (or another automated browser solution) can potentially add much more of a maintenance burden than webrat in :rails mode.

In this particular project, all the JS is written by my partner (I'm
completely JS-clueless). Having a bunch of lines in my cucumber tests
validating everything that should be in the JSON structure my
controllers generate in order for the JS to work (and I have a lot of
them) is the best way for me to be able to tell if I've broken
something (and if I have, in what way I broke it). If the page doesn't
work, I will likely have difficulty figuring out why - unless Cucumber
is there to tell me it didn't find "/response/statusCode" in the JSON
like it should have, then I know what to fix. :)

Though I suppose there's probably no reason RSpec couldn't have done
the same thing. I haven't used it yet in this project.


--
Bill Kocik

http://bkocik.net

From powertoaster at hotmail.com  Thu Jun 18 16:22:24 2009
From: powertoaster at hotmail.com (powertoaster)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:22:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] I am having a problem testing a date in a rails
 view
In-Reply-To: <24002045.post@talk.nabble.com>
References: <23992350.post@talk.nabble.com>
	<57c63afe0906112239h52d66873t71e1fc7a679f0d95@mail.gmail.com>
	<24002045.post@talk.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <24099603.post@talk.nabble.com>


I fixed this problem, I was only checking for a partial string rather than
the full string in the element. The way I discovere dit for those who are
interested was by printing out the response.body object so that I could view
the actuall content I was testing against.:jumping:
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/I-am-having-a-problem-testing-a-date-in-a-rails-view-tp23992350p24099603.html
Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


From andy at cllearview.com  Thu Jun 18 17:42:57 2009
From: andy at cllearview.com (Andy Shipman)
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:42:57 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork and Merb and rSpec
In-Reply-To: <e1a5e9a00906161411s5fc21402r22bcb68031720b8a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com>
	<4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>
	<FE6B370A-E045-4EE7-BEE6-8B587200C4C8@cllearview.com>
	<5D8C3325-5E86-47CC-95DE-F9387C03B2F0@railsnewbie.com>
	<4A3724C9.6000104@benmabey.com>
	<e1a5e9a00906161411s5fc21402r22bcb68031720b8a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2D1C7E84-360D-4227-A866-BCF4A11C8659@cllearview.com>

On 16 Jun 2009, at 22:11, Tim Harper wrote:

> I'm interested to hear your experience with Spork and Merb.  Right  
> now Spork is doing some hooks in to rails (that are actually kind of  
> aggressive right now) to help make spork work more out of the box -  
> specifically, preventing rails from preloading application models  
> and controllers before the fork occurs.
>
> Be sure to run spork -d and look to see which files are being  
> preloaded. Every file listed there will be cached and not reloaded  
> until spork is restarted.
>
> Tim

On a brand new merb app, its clear that Spork isn't going to work too  
well for me then!

6> ~/dev/spork-test % spork -d
Using RSpec
Loading Spork.prefork block...
- Spork Diagnosis -
-- Summary --
app/controllers/application.rb
app/controllers/exceptions.rb
app/helpers/global_helpers.rb
app/models/user.rb
config/dependencies.rb
config/environments/test.rb
config/init.rb
config/router.rb
merb/merb-auth/setup.rb
merb/merb-auth/strategies.rb
merb/session/session.rb
spec/spec_helper.rb

Looking at the way that you're dealing with Rails, and given my lack  
of understanding of Merb internals, I'm not sure that I'm going to get  
too far, tbh.

Any suggestions as to where to start to review this to see if it _can_  
be made to work? Or should I just wait until Merb becomes Rails 3 ;-)

Andy


From lists at ruby-forum.com  Thu Jun 18 21:51:57 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Auto Bot)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 03:51:57 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Can't use Cucumber with Webrat and Selenium
In-Reply-To: <20c51567-6c06-48bd-a8e9-07c8cb0defbe@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
References: <c3a334e42915a3d96b61c9f5a4e1159b@ruby-forum.com>
	<20c51567-6c06-48bd-a8e9-07c8cb0defbe@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <e6c8e81222721044499a3b865d335664@ruby-forum.com>

John Small wrote:
> Well I can't help you but I do have a similar problem. In my case
> Cucumber-Selenium works, Cucumber-Webrat works but Cucmber-Webrat-
> Selenium doesn't work because Webrat issues requests to www.example.com
> and Selenium starts up a mongrel on localhost:3001, connects to it via
> Firefox and then throws up when it gets a request to go to 
> www.example.com.
> I need to find a way to change the host name that Webrat uses when it
> connects via Selenium.

In env.rb

Webrat.configure do |config|
  config.mode = :selenium
  config.application_environment = :test

# Tell where the application is running on for selenium to test
  config.application_address = "#{app_server_host}"
  config.application_port = "#{app_port}"

# Tell where selenium server is running on, when not specified defaults 
to nil (server starts in webrat process and runs locally)
  config.selenium_server_address = "#{selenium_server_host}"
  config.selenium_server_port = "4444"

# Set the key that Selenium uses to determine the browser running
  config.selenium_browser_key = '#{browser}'

end
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From hayafirst at gmail.com  Fri Jun 19 10:24:53 2009
From: hayafirst at gmail.com (Yi Wen)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:24:53 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork 0.57
In-Reply-To: <e6c8e81222721044499a3b865d335664@ruby-forum.com>
References: <c3a334e42915a3d96b61c9f5a4e1159b@ruby-forum.com>
	<20c51567-6c06-48bd-a8e9-07c8cb0defbe@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
	<e6c8e81222721044499a3b865d335664@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <6DEBA903-A481-4009-B91F-B6B317923F34@gmail.com>

Hello,

I has spork 0.5.0 and worked fine. now I updated to spork 0.5.7 which  
seems to break the existing setting. The stack trace looks like this:

Using RSpec
Preloading Rails environment
Loading Spork.prefork block...
uninitialized constant MissingSourceFile (NameError)
/my_proj/vendor/gems/rspec-rails-1.2.6/lib/spec/rails.rb:5
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in  
`gem_original_require'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in  
`require'
/my_porj/spec/spec_helper.rb:8
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork.rb:11:in `prefork'
/my_porj/spec/spec_helper.rb:4
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork/server.rb:166:in `load'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork/server.rb:166:in `preload'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork/app_framework/rails.rb:121:in `preload'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork/server.rb:162:in `preload'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork.rb:41:in `exec_prefork'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork/server.rb:148:in `preload'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork/runner.rb:95:in `run'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/ 
spork/runner.rb:10:in `run'
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/spork:11
/usr/local/bin/spork:19:in `load'
/usr/local/bin/spork:19


It's missing application_controller. THe environment.rb is loaded  
before require 'spec/rails'. Any idea?

Thanks

Yi

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 19 10:33:42 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:33:42 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork 0.57
In-Reply-To: <6DEBA903-A481-4009-B91F-B6B317923F34@gmail.com>
References: <c3a334e42915a3d96b61c9f5a4e1159b@ruby-forum.com>
	<20c51567-6c06-48bd-a8e9-07c8cb0defbe@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
	<e6c8e81222721044499a3b865d335664@ruby-forum.com>
	<6DEBA903-A481-4009-B91F-B6B317923F34@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906190733l5915e3f1y1f440c212a0b27f3@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Yi Wen<hayafirst at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I has spork 0.5.0 and worked fine. now I updated to spork 0.5.7 which seems
> to break the existing setting. The stack trace looks like this:
>
> Using RSpec
> Preloading Rails environment
> Loading Spork.prefork block...
> uninitialized constant MissingSourceFile (NameError)
> /my_proj/vendor/gems/rspec-rails-1.2.6/lib/spec/rails.rb:5
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in
> `gem_original_require'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in `require'
> /my_porj/spec/spec_helper.rb:8
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork.rb:11:in
> `prefork'
> /my_porj/spec/spec_helper.rb:4
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/server.rb:166:in
> `load'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/server.rb:166:in
> `preload'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/app_framework/rails.rb:121:in
> `preload'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/server.rb:162:in
> `preload'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork.rb:41:in
> `exec_prefork'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/server.rb:148:in
> `preload'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/runner.rb:95:in
> `run'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/runner.rb:10:in
> `run'
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/spork:11
> /usr/local/bin/spork:19:in `load'
> /usr/local/bin/spork:19
>
>
> It's missing application_controller. THe environment.rb is loaded before
> require 'spec/rails'. Any idea?

It's probably because of this:
https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/839

If so, just remove the conditional from the line that requires environment.rb



>
> Thanks
>
> Yi
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 19 10:34:16 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:34:16 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork 0.57
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906190733l5915e3f1y1f440c212a0b27f3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c3a334e42915a3d96b61c9f5a4e1159b@ruby-forum.com>
	<20c51567-6c06-48bd-a8e9-07c8cb0defbe@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
	<e6c8e81222721044499a3b865d335664@ruby-forum.com>
	<6DEBA903-A481-4009-B91F-B6B317923F34@gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906190733l5915e3f1y1f440c212a0b27f3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906190734v4118ffc7lc54e276359d78d3@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 9:33 AM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Yi Wen<hayafirst at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I has spork 0.5.0 and worked fine. now I updated to spork 0.5.7 which seems
>> to break the existing setting. The stack trace looks like this:
>>
>> Using RSpec
>> Preloading Rails environment
>> Loading Spork.prefork block...
>> uninitialized constant MissingSourceFile (NameError)
>> /my_proj/vendor/gems/rspec-rails-1.2.6/lib/spec/rails.rb:5
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in
>> `gem_original_require'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in `require'
>> /my_porj/spec/spec_helper.rb:8
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork.rb:11:in
>> `prefork'
>> /my_porj/spec/spec_helper.rb:4
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/server.rb:166:in
>> `load'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/server.rb:166:in
>> `preload'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/app_framework/rails.rb:121:in
>> `preload'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/server.rb:162:in
>> `preload'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork.rb:41:in
>> `exec_prefork'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/server.rb:148:in
>> `preload'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/runner.rb:95:in
>> `run'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../lib/spork/runner.rb:10:in
>> `run'
>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/spork:11
>> /usr/local/bin/spork:19:in `load'
>> /usr/local/bin/spork:19
>>
>>
>> It's missing application_controller. THe environment.rb is loaded before
>> require 'spec/rails'. Any idea?
>
> It's probably because of this:
> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/839
>
> If so, just remove the conditional from the line that requires environment.rb

If that's not it, you may want to try the spork google group:

http://groups.google.com/group/sporkgem


>
>
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Yi
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>

From hayafirst at gmail.com  Fri Jun 19 10:40:26 2009
From: hayafirst at gmail.com (Yi Wen)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:40:26 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork 0.57
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906190734v4118ffc7lc54e276359d78d3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c3a334e42915a3d96b61c9f5a4e1159b@ruby-forum.com>
	<20c51567-6c06-48bd-a8e9-07c8cb0defbe@j12g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>
	<e6c8e81222721044499a3b865d335664@ruby-forum.com>
	<6DEBA903-A481-4009-B91F-B6B317923F34@gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906190733l5915e3f1y1f440c212a0b27f3@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906190734v4118ffc7lc54e276359d78d3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BD315C5C-E0E3-4747-89BA-A5373AB0AAE3@gmail.com>

Yup, removing the condition fixed the problem. Thanks!


On Jun 19, 2009, at 9:34 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 9:33 AM, David  
> Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Yi Wen<hayafirst at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I has spork 0.5.0 and worked fine. now I updated to spork 0.5.7  
>>> which seems
>>> to break the existing setting. The stack trace looks like this:
>>>
>>> Using RSpec
>>> Preloading Rails environment
>>> Loading Spork.prefork block...
>>> uninitialized constant MissingSourceFile (NameError)
>>> /my_proj/vendor/gems/rspec-rails-1.2.6/lib/spec/rails.rb:5
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in
>>> `gem_original_require'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/site_ruby/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:36:in  
>>> `require'
>>> /my_porj/spec/spec_helper.rb:8
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork.rb:11:in
>>> `prefork'
>>> /my_porj/spec/spec_helper.rb:4
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork/server.rb:166:in
>>> `load'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork/server.rb:166:in
>>> `preload'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork/app_framework/rails.rb:121:in
>>> `preload'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork/server.rb:162:in
>>> `preload'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork.rb:41:in
>>> `exec_prefork'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork/server.rb:148:in
>>> `preload'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork/runner.rb:95:in
>>> `run'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/../ 
>>> lib/spork/runner.rb:10:in
>>> `run'
>>> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/timcharper-spork-0.5.7/bin/spork: 
>>> 11
>>> /usr/local/bin/spork:19:in `load'
>>> /usr/local/bin/spork:19
>>>
>>>
>>> It's missing application_controller. THe environment.rb is loaded  
>>> before
>>> require 'spec/rails'. Any idea?
>>
>> It's probably because of this:
>> https://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/839
>>
>> If so, just remove the conditional from the line that requires  
>> environment.rb
>
> If that's not it, you may want to try the spork google group:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/sporkgem
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Yi
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From powertoaster at hotmail.com  Fri Jun 19 14:30:16 2009
From: powertoaster at hotmail.com (powertoaster)
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 11:30:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing my rails authentication controller
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906052038t588fb3b6h362a86bfd11e628c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <004f01c9e619$a7466870$f5d33950$@com>
	<57c63afe0906052038t588fb3b6h362a86bfd11e628c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <24116711.post@talk.nabble.com>


David thank you, that worked great. I am doing this and am very happy with
the result.

      Employee.stub(:authenticate).with(params[:username],
params[:password]).and_return(nil)
      post :login, params
      session[:employee_id].should be_nil
      response.should redirect_to(:controller => "access", :action =>
"login")

The question I have now is how do I test the other controllers. Since all of
my other pages are going to require authentication.

How do I mock the login functionality in a way that allows me to test my
protected pages as if I were logged in without using an actual post to the
login controller, and still get the :employee_id in the session?

I tried adding this in a before each do

    @params = {:username => 'MyString', :password => 'MyString'}
    Employee.stub(:authenticate).with(params[:username],
params[:password]).and_return(mock_model(Employee, :id => 1))
    session[:employee_id] = 1

Which successfully sets the session variable, but my test fails.

describe "GET index" do
    it "assigns all details as @details" do
      Detail.stub!(:find).with(:all).and_return([mock_detail])
      get :index
      session[:employee_id].should == 1                          <+++++++++
This passes
      assigns[:details].should == [mock_detail]                 <+++++++++
This fails
    end
  end

I get 

expected: [#<Detail:0x23246b2 @name="Detail_1001">],
     got: nil (using ==)





-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Testing-my-rails-authentication-controller-tp23895779p24116711.html
Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


From timcharper at gmail.com  Sat Jun 20 21:39:57 2009
From: timcharper at gmail.com (Tim Harper)
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 19:39:57 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Spork and Merb and rSpec
In-Reply-To: <2D1C7E84-360D-4227-A866-BCF4A11C8659@cllearview.com>
References: <F4E02D57-9EBC-48F5-91C3-535C24AC4994@cllearview.com> 
	<4A364FF0.6030405@railsnewbie.com>
	<FE6B370A-E045-4EE7-BEE6-8B587200C4C8@cllearview.com> 
	<5D8C3325-5E86-47CC-95DE-F9387C03B2F0@railsnewbie.com>
	<4A3724C9.6000104@benmabey.com> 
	<e1a5e9a00906161411s5fc21402r22bcb68031720b8a@mail.gmail.com> 
	<2D1C7E84-360D-4227-A866-BCF4A11C8659@cllearview.com>
Message-ID: <e1a5e9a00906201839m6372b9bar446f0c7f74d6464e@mail.gmail.com>

Hey Andy,
I'd be happy to work with you on getting merb support going. I'm not a merb
developer myself, but I am interested in expanding spork to work with other
frameworks.

I'll create a merb app and see what I can do to get it to work.

Tim

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 3:42 PM, Andy Shipman <andy at cllearview.com> wrote:

> On 16 Jun 2009, at 22:11, Tim Harper wrote:
>
>  I'm interested to hear your experience with Spork and Merb.  Right now
>> Spork is doing some hooks in to rails (that are actually kind of aggressive
>> right now) to help make spork work more out of the box - specifically,
>> preventing rails from preloading application models and controllers before
>> the fork occurs.
>>
>> Be sure to run spork -d and look to see which files are being preloaded.
>> Every file listed there will be cached and not reloaded until spork is
>> restarted.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>
> On a brand new merb app, its clear that Spork isn't going to work too well
> for me then!
>
> 6> ~/dev/spork-test % spork -d
> Using RSpec
> Loading Spork.prefork block...
> - Spork Diagnosis -
> -- Summary --
> app/controllers/application.rb
> app/controllers/exceptions.rb
> app/helpers/global_helpers.rb
> app/models/user.rb
> config/dependencies.rb
> config/environments/test.rb
> config/init.rb
> config/router.rb
> merb/merb-auth/setup.rb
> merb/merb-auth/strategies.rb
> merb/session/session.rb
> spec/spec_helper.rb
>
> Looking at the way that you're dealing with Rails, and given my lack of
> understanding of Merb internals, I'm not sure that I'm going to get too far,
> tbh.
>
> Any suggestions as to where to start to review this to see if it _can_ be
> made to work? Or should I just wait until Merb becomes Rails 3 ;-)
>
> Andy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090620/f2ccdf57/attachment.html>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Mon Jun 22 02:53:15 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Wolfram Arnold)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 08:53:15 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] [Cucumber] Successive requests with xml Content-Type
	fail?
Message-ID: <889342016bcb9f8f7ada63734f1d1e25@ruby-forum.com>

I'm writing a cucumber test for an xml webservice.  When making POST's
the Content-Type in the header is set to "application/xml" and for any
request, the Accept header is set to "application/xml" (aka
Mime::XML.to_s)

I'm running into the following issue:

When I make two successive requests, the first one being a POST to log
the user in; the second one a GET to retrieve some data, the second
request always seems to fail with this error:

      private method `split' called for #<Mime::Type:0x7f60a708ff70>
(NoMethodError)
      /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/mime_type.rb:206:in
`method_missing'
      /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rack-1.0.0/lib/rack/request.rb:51:in
`media_type'
      /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rack-1.0.0/lib/rack/request.rb:117:in
`parseable_data?'
      /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rack-1.0.0/lib/rack/request.rb:138:in
`POST'
      /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/request.rb:428:in
`request_parameters'
      /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/request.rb:381:in
`parameters'


This started happening only in Rails 2.3.  It previously worked fine
with Rails 2.0

Now, I dug into this some more; the Session class in webrat core seems
to get instantiated once for the entire scenario and the instance sticks
around for all of the requests.  I noticed by checking with the
debugger, that the header object gets transformed into a Rack header
object and acquires things like the referrer field from the first
request.  On the second request (the GET), the Content-Type is set but
it probably shouldn't--as there is no payload data, it's a GET--and that
causes havoc.  I'm kind of lost as to whether this is a bug in Rack or
Rails or Webrat or whether I'm doing something wrong.

Any advice is appreciated.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 04:22:32 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:22:32 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] [Cucumber] Successive requests with xml
	Content-Type fail?
In-Reply-To: <889342016bcb9f8f7ada63734f1d1e25@ruby-forum.com>
References: <889342016bcb9f8f7ada63734f1d1e25@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906220122o3ea21887nf74f734cd9a71f92@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 1:53 AM, Wolfram Arnold<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> I'm writing a cucumber test for an xml webservice. ?When making POST's
> the Content-Type in the header is set to "application/xml" and for any
> request, the Accept header is set to "application/xml" (aka
> Mime::XML.to_s)
>
> I'm running into the following issue:
>
> When I make two successive requests, the first one being a POST to log
> the user in; the second one a GET to retrieve some data, the second
> request always seems to fail with this error:
>
> ? ? ?private method `split' called for #<Mime::Type:0x7f60a708ff70>
> (NoMethodError)
> ? ? ?/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/mime_type.rb:206:in
> `method_missing'
> ? ? ?/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rack-1.0.0/lib/rack/request.rb:51:in
> `media_type'
> ? ? ?/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rack-1.0.0/lib/rack/request.rb:117:in
> `parseable_data?'
> ? ? ?/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rack-1.0.0/lib/rack/request.rb:138:in
> `POST'
> ? ? ?/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/request.rb:428:in
> `request_parameters'
> ? ? ?/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/request.rb:381:in
> `parameters'
>
>
> This started happening only in Rails 2.3. ?It previously worked fine
> with Rails 2.0
>
> Now, I dug into this some more; the Session class in webrat core seems
> to get instantiated once for the entire scenario and the instance sticks
> around for all of the requests. ?I noticed by checking with the
> debugger, that the header object gets transformed into a Rack header
> object and acquires things like the referrer field from the first
> request. ?On the second request (the GET), the Content-Type is set but
> it probably shouldn't--as there is no payload data, it's a GET--and that
> causes havoc. ?I'm kind of lost as to whether this is a bug in Rack or
> Rails or Webrat or whether I'm doing something wrong.
>
> Any advice is appreciated.

Cucumber has had a separate list for some time now. Please post this
to http://groups.google.com/group/cukes.

Cheers,
David

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 11:52:46 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:52:46 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] [Cucumber] Autospec run "only" features ?
In-Reply-To: <670a00380906220850o6633b505ia03749441741a22e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <670a00380906220850o6633b505ia03749441741a22e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906220852q29791401m6886521e2f536b3b@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Peter
Fitzgibbons<peter.fitzgibbons at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello All,
> Is there a way to Autospec "only" my features?

Autospec is RSpec's thin wrapper that specifically enables running
specs. If you don't want to run your specs, use the autotest command
instead.

> I know this is an anti-pattern. ?Just trying to auto-cycle while figuring
> out some things with Cucumber.
> Once I get the Cuke code ironed out, I'd happily return to correct
> Rspec-Then-Cuke auto-cycling.
> Thoughts?
> Peter Fitzgibbons
> (847) 687-7646
> Email: peter.fitzgibbons at gmail.com
> IM GTalk: peter.fitzgibbons
> IM Yahoo: pjfitzgibbons
> IM MSN: pjfitzgibbons at hotmail.com
> IM AOL: peter.fitzgibbons at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 12:37:53 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:37:53 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Where to put macros
In-Reply-To: <88fd8ddc0906220928mddfb98au899e0fbfac3df7ac@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906220928mddfb98au899e0fbfac3df7ac@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906220937w6983d5b2u725747a6dfbd9ed5@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com> wrote:
> Recently I got some wonderful help from the list to create my NamedAddress
> module/macro which tests NamedAddresses for a number of different resources.
> The question I have is where should I put this module? At the moment I've
> got it in spec_helper, but this feels a bit messy
> Many thanks
> Andrew

The convention that I see emerging is to keep macros, helpers, and any
other spec supporting material in spec/support/macros,
spec/support/matchers, etc. Then you do this in spec/spec_helper.rb:

Dir[File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/support/**/*.rb"].each {|f| require f}

What would folks think if that was included in the generated
spec_helper in spec-rails?

Cheers,
David

From ben at benmabey.com  Mon Jun 22 12:43:23 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:43:23 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Where to put macros
In-Reply-To: <88fd8ddc0906220928mddfb98au899e0fbfac3df7ac@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906220928mddfb98au899e0fbfac3df7ac@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A52247D5-77AC-4DA6-BE87-5566C57577C3@benmabey.com>

On Jun 22, 2009, at 10:28 AM, Andrew Premdas wrote:

> Recently I got some wonderful help from the list to create my  
> NamedAddress module/macro which tests NamedAddresses for a number of  
> different resources.
>
> The question I have is where should I put this module? At the moment  
> I've got it in spec_helper, but this feels a bit messy
>
> Many thanks
>
> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


Hey Andrew,
I don't think there is a known convention for this.  If I only use the  
macro for a single set of examples then I leave the macro code inline  
with the actual examples.  Once I need it in multiple files then I  
will move it to my root spec dir.  I suppose you could create a spec/ 
macros dir if you want (this would make it easier to require all of  
the ones you have).  I generally don't have a whole lot so I just put  
my macros and matchers under spec/ and let spec_helper require them.   
Then in your spec helper if you want all of your examples to have  
access to these macros you can say:

Spec::Runner.configure do |config|
   config.extend(MyMacro, MyOtherMacro)
end

HTH,
Ben

From ben at benmabey.com  Mon Jun 22 12:44:42 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:44:42 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Where to put macros
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906220937w6983d5b2u725747a6dfbd9ed5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906220928mddfb98au899e0fbfac3df7ac@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906220937w6983d5b2u725747a6dfbd9ed5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C2DDE51F-2B41-4736-8488-AF3BBA09AF88@benmabey.com>


On Jun 22, 2009, at 10:37 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> Recently I got some wonderful help from the list to create my  
>> NamedAddress
>> module/macro which tests NamedAddresses for a number of different  
>> resources.
>> The question I have is where should I put this module? At the  
>> moment I've
>> got it in spec_helper, but this feels a bit messy
>> Many thanks
>> Andrew
>
> The convention that I see emerging is to keep macros, helpers, and any
> other spec supporting material in spec/support/macros,
> spec/support/matchers, etc. Then you do this in spec/spec_helper.rb:
>
> Dir[File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/support/**/*.rb"].each {|f| require f}
>
> What would folks think if that was included in the generated
> spec_helper in spec-rails?

Just as I said there was no written convention... :)

I like it.  +1

-Ben

From sfeley at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 13:55:54 2009
From: sfeley at gmail.com (Stephen Eley)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:55:54 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Where to put macros
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906220937w6983d5b2u725747a6dfbd9ed5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906220928mddfb98au899e0fbfac3df7ac@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906220937w6983d5b2u725747a6dfbd9ed5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1fb4df0906221055p9d0ffa8o7971f4ab767716b6@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:37 PM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The convention that I see emerging is to keep macros, helpers, and any
> other spec supporting material in spec/support/macros,
> spec/support/matchers, etc.

+1 from me too.  I've been calling my directory spec/helpers, but I've
been working on non-Rails projects lately and it only just now
occurred to me that it would cause a name collision.  >8->


> Dir[File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/support/**/*.rb"].each {|f| require f}

On a total non sequitur: has anyone ever come up with a clean, general
syntactic sugar for cleaning up all of these ubiquitous File/Dir class
methods and __FILE__ constants and other ugly filesystem machinery on
requires?

If no one knows of such a convenience, I might have to take a day or
so and write something.  Most of the rest of Ruby is so elegant and
pretty that seeing this stuff at the top of every file hurts my eyes a
bit.  It's like getting a small static shock each time you settle into
your comfortable luxury car.


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 13:57:54 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:57:54 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing a FormBuilder
In-Reply-To: <5a24fdec0906221053o537f017fv574968e1967cca07@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5a24fdec0906221053o537f017fv574968e1967cca07@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906221057q5817cb13g77a01292d6eaef96@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Peer Allan<peer at bipolarsoftware.ca> wrote:
> Hello all,
> In a bit of a conundrum here. ?I have a custom form builder I am trying to
> test and can't seem to get it to work. ?I found this
> http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2007/12/rspec-and-rails/

Things have changed a bit since Dec 07. The helper module is no longer
included directly in the example group, but are exposed through a
helper object instead.

> which helps in that it
> points me to the?HelperExampleGroup to get the @template methods I am going
> to need. ?The problem is that we have our form builders in their own folder
> (app/form_builders) and hence their own spec folder (spec/form_builders).
> ?How can I get the specs in that folder (spec/form_builders) to behave like
> they were helper tests so that I have access to the @template object?
> Thanks
> Peer

describe "thing", :type => :helper do
  ...
end

Cheers,
David

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 15:31:56 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 14:31:56 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing a FormBuilder
In-Reply-To: <5a24fdec0906221207mbaf4fdawe78dd33aea3f9df3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5a24fdec0906221053o537f017fv574968e1967cca07@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906221057q5817cb13g77a01292d6eaef96@mail.gmail.com>
	<5a24fdec0906221207mbaf4fdawe78dd33aea3f9df3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906221231u202848bg3a5954428ec4baaa@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Peer Allan<peer at bipolarsoftware.ca> wrote:
> Still having trouble, here is my code.
> Code:
> class?MyFormBuilder?< ActionView::Helpers::FormBuilder
> ??def custom_select(field_name, *args)
> ?? ?field_name ||= :salutation
> ?? ?salutations =
> Lookup.for_type_and_column('Contact','salutation').map{|lookup|
> lookup.description}
> ?? ?select(field_name, salutations, :include_blank => true, :prompt =>
> "Please select salutation..")
> ??end
> end
> Spec:
> ??before(:each) do
> ?? ?@object = mock_model(Company)
> ?? ?@builder = MyFormBuilder.new(:company, @object, self, {}, nil)
> ??end
>
> ??it "should return collection of currency codes" do
> ??? @builder.custom_select(:salutation, {})
> ??end
> No assertion in there, but it doesn't matter because I get this error:
> private method `select' called for
> #<ActiveSupport::TestCase::Subclass_1::Subclass_1:0x72b229c>
> I haven't had any success getting around this one, without stubbing beyond
> recognition. ?Any ideas?

This is what I was saying before - that you can't use self anymore
because the helper module is not included in the current context.
Instead, use the helper object:

@builder = MyFormBuilder.new(:company, @object, helper, {}, nil)

HTH,
David

> peer
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:57 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Peer Allan<peer at bipolarsoftware.ca>
>> wrote:
>> > Hello all,
>> > In a bit of a conundrum here. ?I have a custom form builder I am trying
>> > to
>> > test and can't seem to get it to work. ?I found this
>> > http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2007/12/rspec-and-rails/
>>
>> Things have changed a bit since Dec 07. The helper module is no longer
>> included directly in the example group, but are exposed through a
>> helper object instead.
>>
>> > which helps in that it
>> > points me to the?HelperExampleGroup to get the @template methods I am
>> > going
>> > to need. ?The problem is that we have our form builders in their own
>> > folder
>> > (app/form_builders) and hence their own spec folder
>> > (spec/form_builders).
>> > ?How can I get the specs in that folder (spec/form_builders) to behave
>> > like
>> > they were helper tests so that I have access to the @template object?
>> > Thanks
>> > Peer
>>
>> describe "thing", :type => :helper do
>> ?...
>> end
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 16:02:52 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:02:52 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing a FormBuilder
In-Reply-To: <5a24fdec0906221257v2800338am8400b3ce5cb63d01@mail.gmail.com>
References: <5a24fdec0906221053o537f017fv574968e1967cca07@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906221057q5817cb13g77a01292d6eaef96@mail.gmail.com>
	<5a24fdec0906221207mbaf4fdawe78dd33aea3f9df3@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906221231u202848bg3a5954428ec4baaa@mail.gmail.com>
	<5a24fdec0906221257v2800338am8400b3ce5cb63d01@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906221302q66754a1cy9e5b2c78b58ee676@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Peer Allan<peer at bipolarsoftware.ca> wrote:
> Thanks David, I completely missed that in your first response.

No problem. Let me know if it helps :)

> Peer
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:31 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:07 PM, Peer Allan<peer at bipolarsoftware.ca>
>> wrote:
>> > Still having trouble, here is my code.
>> > Code:
>> > class?MyFormBuilder?< ActionView::Helpers::FormBuilder
>> > ??def custom_select(field_name, *args)
>> > ?? ?field_name ||= :salutation
>> > ?? ?salutations =
>> > Lookup.for_type_and_column('Contact','salutation').map{|lookup|
>> > lookup.description}
>> > ?? ?select(field_name, salutations, :include_blank => true, :prompt =>
>> > "Please select salutation..")
>> > ??end
>> > end
>> > Spec:
>> > ??before(:each) do
>> > ?? ?@object = mock_model(Company)
>> > ?? ?@builder = MyFormBuilder.new(:company, @object, self, {}, nil)
>> > ??end
>> >
>> > ??it "should return collection of currency codes" do
>> > ??? @builder.custom_select(:salutation, {})
>> > ??end
>> > No assertion in there, but it doesn't matter because I get this error:
>> > private method `select' called for
>> > #<ActiveSupport::TestCase::Subclass_1::Subclass_1:0x72b229c>
>> > I haven't had any success getting around this one, without stubbing
>> > beyond
>> > recognition. ?Any ideas?
>>
>> This is what I was saying before - that you can't use self anymore
>> because the helper module is not included in the current context.
>> Instead, use the helper object:
>>
>> @builder = MyFormBuilder.new(:company, @object, helper, {}, nil)
>>
>> HTH,
>> David
>>
>> > peer
>> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:57 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Peer Allan<peer at bipolarsoftware.ca>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hello all,
>> >> > In a bit of a conundrum here. ?I have a custom form builder I am
>> >> > trying
>> >> > to
>> >> > test and can't seem to get it to work. ?I found this
>> >> > http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2007/12/rspec-and-rails/
>> >>
>> >> Things have changed a bit since Dec 07. The helper module is no longer
>> >> included directly in the example group, but are exposed through a
>> >> helper object instead.
>> >>
>> >> > which helps in that it
>> >> > points me to the?HelperExampleGroup to get the @template methods I am
>> >> > going
>> >> > to need. ?The problem is that we have our form builders in their own
>> >> > folder
>> >> > (app/form_builders) and hence their own spec folder
>> >> > (spec/form_builders).
>> >> > ?How can I get the specs in that folder (spec/form_builders) to
>> >> > behave
>> >> > like
>> >> > they were helper tests so that I have access to the @template object?
>> >> > Thanks
>> >> > Peer
>> >>
>> >> describe "thing", :type => :helper do
>> >> ?...
>> >> end
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> David
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> rspec-users mailing list
>> >> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > rspec-users mailing list
>> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From stefan.kanev at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 17:18:17 2009
From: stefan.kanev at gmail.com (Stefan Kanev)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:18:17 +0300
Subject: [rspec-users] Where to put macros
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906220937w6983d5b2u725747a6dfbd9ed5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <88fd8ddc0906220928mddfb98au899e0fbfac3df7ac@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906220937w6983d5b2u725747a6dfbd9ed5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <285b75bb0906221418m260d8196x6684566c3f81cee6@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 7:37 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Andrew Premdas<apremdas at gmail.com>
> wrote:What would folks think if that was included in the generated
> spec_helper in spec-rails?
>

I, while not a regular patron in this mailing list, +1 this too.

It would be very nice if the autogenerated Rails files specify a
conventional place to put macros/matchers. I would have a lot lower
psychological barrier to adding few of those in my Rails applications.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090623/a0c7392a/attachment.html>

From anthony.h.burns at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 17:36:56 2009
From: anthony.h.burns at gmail.com (Anthony Burns)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:36:56 +0300
Subject: [rspec-users] Expected output matches rendered output but still
 getting error in view spec
Message-ID: <4A3FF978.6000504@dirtyalpaca.com>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hello all,

I've just gotten started using BDD with RSpec/Cucumber/Webrat and
Rails and I've run into some frustration trying to get my view spec to
pass.

First of all, I am running Ruby 1.9.1p129 with Rails 2.3.2, RSpec and
RSpec-Rails 1.2.6, Cucumber 0.3.11, and Webrat 0.4.4.

Here is the code relevant to my question

config/routes.rb:

    map.b_posts                  'backend/posts',
                                          :controller => 'backend/
posts',
                                          :action => 'backend_index',
                                           :conditions => { :method
=> :get }

    map.connect                  'backend/posts',
                                          :controller => 'backend/
posts',
                                           :action => 'create',
                                           :conditions => { :method
=> :post }

views/backend/posts/create.html.erb:

    <% form_tag do %>
    <% end %>

*spec/views/backend/posts/create.html.erb_spec.rb:*

    describe "backend/posts/create.html.erb" do
      it "should render a form to create a post" do
        render "backend/posts/create.html.erb"
        response.should have_selector("form", :method =>
'post', :action => b_posts_path) do |form|
          # Nothing here yet.
        end
      end
    end

Here is the relevant part of the output when I run script/spec:

'backend/posts/create.html.erb should render a form to create a post'
FAILED
expected following output to contain a <form method='post' action='/
backend/posts'/> tag:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://
www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
<html><body><form action="/backend/posts" method="post">
</form></body></html>

It would appear to me that what have_selector is looking for is
exactly what the template generates, yet the example still fails. I am
very much looking forward to seeing my error (because I have a feeling
it is my error). Any help is much appreciated!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAko/+XMACgkQaSfff6Oi7PgTrACfdLx7gDTgYZUT8vc+CVuzuSVg
JoUAnRuSVqaM2Ag4orIQAv3gAZpqrDB7
=G8v7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From pj at crushlovely.com  Mon Jun 22 18:19:56 2009
From: pj at crushlovely.com (PJ Kelly)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:19:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Spec'ing the result of rescue_from
Message-ID: <ca255124-f26e-41f7-97c9-bb392f8479fb@d7g2000prl.googlegroups.com>

Hey All,

In my app, I have actions that are restricted to only POST requests in
config/routes.rb.  We were getting a fair number of MethodNotAllowed
errors on these actions.  In most cases, we're ok with sending the
user back to the homepage, however there are a few exceptions where
we'd like to send them a specific action.  My spec looks like this:

  describe "GET process_step_2" do
    it "should redirect to step_2" do
      rescue_action_in_public!
      get :process_step_2
      response.should redirect_to(application_step_2_url)
    end
  end

Then my application controller, I decided to rescue_from, so it looks
like this:

class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
  rescue_from ActionController::MethodNotAllowed, :with
=> :invalid_method

  protected

  def invalid_method
    redirect_to previous_step_url
  end

  def previous_step_url
    case request.env["REQUEST_URI"]
    when /step_2\/process/
      application_step_2_url
    else
      root_url
    end
  end
end

The spec fails even though when you re-create the situation in the
browser, the code works.

What am I doing wrong here?  Am I even going about this in the right
way?

Thanks in advance for your help.

Best, PJ

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 18:43:14 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 17:43:14 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Spec'ing the result of rescue_from
In-Reply-To: <ca255124-f26e-41f7-97c9-bb392f8479fb@d7g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
References: <ca255124-f26e-41f7-97c9-bb392f8479fb@d7g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906221543x1068deeehe035cc35ee2499da@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 5:19 PM, PJ Kelly<pj at crushlovely.com> wrote:
> Hey All,
>
> In my app, I have actions that are restricted to only POST requests in
> config/routes.rb. ?We were getting a fair number of MethodNotAllowed
> errors on these actions. ?In most cases, we're ok with sending the
> user back to the homepage, however there are a few exceptions where
> we'd like to send them a specific action. ?My spec looks like this:
>
> ?describe "GET process_step_2" do
> ? ?it "should redirect to step_2" do
> ? ? ?rescue_action_in_public!
> ? ? ?get :process_step_2
> ? ? ?response.should redirect_to(application_step_2_url)
> ? ?end
> ?end
>
> Then my application controller, I decided to rescue_from, so it looks
> like this:
>
> class ApplicationController < ActionController::Base
> ?rescue_from ActionController::MethodNotAllowed, :with
> => :invalid_method
>
> ?protected
>
> ?def invalid_method
> ? ?redirect_to previous_step_url
> ?end
>
> ?def previous_step_url
> ? ?case request.env["REQUEST_URI"]
> ? ?when /step_2\/process/
> ? ? ?application_step_2_url
> ? ?else
> ? ? ?root_url
> ? ?end
> ?end
> end
>
> The spec fails even though when you re-create the situation in the
> browser, the code works.

What's the failure message?

>
> What am I doing wrong here? ?Am I even going about this in the right
> way?
>
> Thanks in advance for your help.
>
> Best, PJ
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 22:21:32 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:21:32 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] [ANN] rspec 1.2.7 Released
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906221921j35f3926brd7a6f377d069c3@mail.gmail.com>

rspec-1.2.7 has been released!

* <http://rspec.info>
* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/rspec>
* <http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/wikis>
* <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
* <rspec-devel at rubyforge.org>

Behaviour Driven Development for Ruby.

Changes:

### Version 1.2.7 / 2009-06-22

* enhancments
  * added support for fakes using obj.stub(:method) { # implementation }
  * allow subject { self } (Jarmo Pertman). Closes #816.
  * friendly error message when a matcher returns nil on a failure message
  * add ruby_cmd option to SpecTask (Rick DeNatale). Closes #823.
    * also added missing specs for SpecTask - thanks Rick!
  * add support for generating matchers with fluent interfaces with the
    Matcher DSL

* bug fixes
  * NegativeOperatorMatcher now returns false (Wesley Beary). Closes #812.
  * derive MockExpectationError from Exception rather than StandardError
    (Kerry Buckley). Closes #830.
  * fix bug where multi-line failure messages weren't getting picked up by
    autotest (Jarmo Pertman). Closes #832.
  * --line_number now works for it { should xxx } format (assist from Fred
    Lee)
  * warn instead of raise when there is no description supplied for an
    example. Closes #840.

* <http://rspec.info>
* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/rspec>
* <http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/wikis>
* <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
* <rspec-devel at rubyforge.org>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Jun 22 22:21:40 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:21:40 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] [ANN] rspec-rails 1.2.7 Released
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906221921x7b874e0fs813b172a4675af97@mail.gmail.com>

rspec-rails-1.2.7 has been released!

Behaviour Driven Development for Ruby on Rails.

Changes:

### Version 1.2.7 / 2009-06-22

* enhancements
  * alias :stub!, :stub so rspec-rails extensions of rspec stubs can use the
    same syntax as rspec (core)
  * integration specs (Ben Mabey and David Chelimsky)
  * added support for references and belongs_to generated model specs (Jos?
    Valim). Closes #792.
  * add discovery for autotest-rails to keep compatible with ZenTest-4.0.0
    (Ryan Davis). Closes #838.
  * controller specs in isolation mode don't care whether the file exists
    anymore!

* bug fixes
  * allow rspec-rails to work without ActiveRecord. Closes #810.
  * fix bug with have() matcher failure message (Dave Giunta). Closes #818.
  * fix bug where render_template('new') would pass if 'newer' was rendered
    (or anything that started with 'new')

* deprecations
  * spec_server is now deprecated - use spork instead (gem install spork).
    Closes #827.

* <http://rspec.info>
* <http://rubyforge.org/projects/rspec>
* <http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec-rails>
* <http://wiki.github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/rails>
* <rspec-devel at rubyforge.org>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun 23 01:16:51 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:16:51 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] [ANN] rspec-rails 1.2.7 Released
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906221921x7b874e0fs813b172a4675af97@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57c63afe0906221921x7b874e0fs813b172a4675af97@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906222216p2a62cf68i4a311d8399e1d44e@mail.gmail.com>

I just pushed 1.2.7.1 to fix a bug in "script/generate rspec". Please
use this instead of the 1.2.7 gem.

Cheers,
David

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 9:21 PM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> rspec-rails-1.2.7 has been released!
>
> Behaviour Driven Development for Ruby on Rails.
>
> Changes:
>
> ### Version 1.2.7 / 2009-06-22
>
> * enhancements
> ?* alias :stub!, :stub so rspec-rails extensions of rspec stubs can use the
> ? ?same syntax as rspec (core)
> ?* integration specs (Ben Mabey and David Chelimsky)
> ?* added support for references and belongs_to generated model specs (Jos?
> ? ?Valim). Closes #792.
> ?* add discovery for autotest-rails to keep compatible with ZenTest-4.0.0
> ? ?(Ryan Davis). Closes #838.
> ?* controller specs in isolation mode don't care whether the file exists
> ? ?anymore!
>
> * bug fixes
> ?* allow rspec-rails to work without ActiveRecord. Closes #810.
> ?* fix bug with have() matcher failure message (Dave Giunta). Closes #818.
> ?* fix bug where render_template('new') would pass if 'newer' was rendered
> ? ?(or anything that started with 'new')
>
> * deprecations
> ?* spec_server is now deprecated - use spork instead (gem install spork).
> ? ?Closes #827.
>
> * <http://rspec.info>
> * <http://rubyforge.org/projects/rspec>
> * <http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec-rails>
> * <http://wiki.github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/rails>
> * <rspec-devel at rubyforge.org>
>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun 23 05:12:00 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Tom Hoen)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:12:00 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] any idea why spec_server gets 'cannot remove Object'
	error?
Message-ID: <7df13a180210246a40d87100c25a9e7d@ruby-forum.com>

I am sure better minds than mine can figure this out, but I am stumped.

When I run any spec using spec_server, a get 0 failures and the command
prompt returns without issue.

If I run the same spec again, I still get 0 failures, but it concludes
with the following error:

(druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:603:in
`remove_const': Cannot remove Object::ClassMethods (NameError)
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:603:in
`remove_constant'
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:603:in
`instance_eval'
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:603:in
`remove_constant'
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:450:in
`remove_unloadable_constants!'
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:450:in
`each'
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:450:in
`remove_unloadable_constants!'
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:236:in
`clear'
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/dispatcher.rb:65:in
`cleanup_application'
        from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-rails-1.2.6/lib/spec/rails/spec_server.rb:106:in
`run'
        from
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner/drb_command_line.rb:14:in
`run'
        from
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner/option_parser.rb:193:in
`parse_drb'
        from
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner/option_parser.rb:130:in
`order!'
        from
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner.rb:51:in
`options'
        from
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner/command_line.rb:6:in
`run'
        from
c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/bin/spec:4
        from c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/bin/spec:19:in `load'
        from c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/bin/spec:19


running the spec a third time, most of my tests fail with the following
sample error:
TypeError in 'School can add staff_members'
can't dup NilClass

If I kill the spec_server, restart it, the cycle begins again.

Previously, spec server ran without issue, using individual

I am running:
rspec and rspec on rails 1.2.6
Rails 2.3.2
ruby 1.8.6 (2007-09-24 patchlevel 111) [i386-mswin32]
Windows Vista

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Tom
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun 23 10:19:02 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:19:02 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] any idea why spec_server gets 'cannot remove
	Object' error?
In-Reply-To: <7df13a180210246a40d87100c25a9e7d@ruby-forum.com>
References: <7df13a180210246a40d87100c25a9e7d@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906230719t211872abm67200c5aa1d22d5c@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:12 AM, Tom Hoen<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> I am sure better minds than mine can figure this out, but I am stumped.
>
> When I run any spec using spec_server, a get 0 failures and the command
> prompt returns without issue.
>
> If I run the same spec again, I still get 0 failures, but it concludes
> with the following error:
>
> (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:603:in
> `remove_const': Cannot remove Object::ClassMethods (NameError)
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:603:in
> `remove_constant'
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:603:in
> `instance_eval'
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:603:in
> `remove_constant'
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:450:in
> `remove_unloadable_constants!'
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:450:in
> `each'
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:450:in
> `remove_unloadable_constants!'
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.2/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:236:in
> `clear'
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-2.3.2/lib/action_controller/dispatcher.rb:65:in
> `cleanup_application'
> ? ? ? ?from (druby://127.0.0.1:8989)
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-rails-1.2.6/lib/spec/rails/spec_server.rb:106:in
> `run'
> ? ? ? ?from
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner/drb_command_line.rb:14:in
> `run'
> ? ? ? ?from
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner/option_parser.rb:193:in
> `parse_drb'
> ? ? ? ?from
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner/option_parser.rb:130:in
> `order!'
> ? ? ? ?from
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner.rb:51:in
> `options'
> ? ? ? ?from
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/lib/spec/runner/command_line.rb:6:in
> `run'
> ? ? ? ?from
> c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.2.6/bin/spec:4
> ? ? ? ?from c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/bin/spec:19:in `load'
> ? ? ? ?from c:/InstantRails-2.0-win/ruby/bin/spec:19
>
>
> running the spec a third time, most of my tests fail with the following
> sample error:
> TypeError in 'School can add staff_members'
> can't dup NilClass
>
> If I kill the spec_server, restart it, the cycle begins again.
>
> Previously, spec server ran without issue, using individual

Previously to what? What changed?

Also - just a heads up that spec_server is deprecated in 1.2.7 and
will be removed in 1.2.8. I prefer to avoid removing things in point
releases, but spec_server has been problematic (behaving very
differently for a lot of different environments and configurations),
and Tim Harper's new spork gem [1] serves the same purpose in a very
elegant way, so the migration path is simple.

gem install spork
cd path/to/project
spork bootstrap --rspec
# edit spec/spec_helper.rb

You may have better luck if you migrate now.

Cheers,
David

[1] http://github.com/timcharper/spork

>
> I am running:
> rspec and rspec on rails 1.2.6
> Rails 2.3.2
> ruby 1.8.6 (2007-09-24 patchlevel 111) [i386-mswin32]
> Windows Vista
>
> Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Tom
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun 23 10:38:21 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Tom Hoen)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 16:38:21 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] any idea why spec_server gets 'cannot remove
	Object' error?
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906230719t211872abm67200c5aa1d22d5c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7df13a180210246a40d87100c25a9e7d@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906230719t211872abm67200c5aa1d22d5c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d7694cfb7b42f4940e9bec73b1b4e1b7@ruby-forum.com>

David - Thank you for responding.



> 
> Previously to what? What changed?
> 


The only changes were some additional models/controllers and specs for 
both, and I installed and used (in one of the models) open_ssl. My plan 
it to revert until I find a point at which things start to work again, 
unless someone has a better idea.


> 
> gem install spork
> cd path/to/project
> spork bootstrap --rspec
> # edit spec/spec_helper.rb
> 

Alas, I develop on Windows. So no spork. As of yet.

Thanks for your advice.
Tom
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From mbread at m-bread.com  Tue Jun 23 11:24:34 2009
From: mbread at m-bread.com (mBread)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:24:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Asynchronous requests (effectively in multiple
 browser windows)
Message-ID: <24167319.post@talk.nabble.com>


Hi. I'm using cucumber on a rails app along with rspec & webrat. Is there any
way in cucumber to write scenarios that would use more than one window in an
equivalent manual test?

I am wanting to write a feature scenario for this manual test: log in, load
up a form that it only visible to logged in users, log out in a different
window, then submit the form in the original window. is this possible, and
should it be in cucumber that I am testing this, or is it a lower-level
test?

Thanks,
mBread
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Asynchronous-requests-%28effectively-in-multiple-browser-windows%29-tp24167319p24167319.html
Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun 23 13:34:31 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:34:31 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Asynchronous requests (effectively in multiple
	browser windows)
In-Reply-To: <24167319.post@talk.nabble.com>
References: <24167319.post@talk.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906231034i1a2068eudff40501e7543ee3@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:24 AM, mBread<mbread at m-bread.com> wrote:
>
> Hi. I'm using cucumber on a rails app along with rspec & webrat. Is there any
> way in cucumber to write scenarios that would use more than one window in an
> equivalent manual test?
>
> I am wanting to write a feature scenario for this manual test: log in, load
> up a form that it only visible to logged in users, log out in a different
> window, then submit the form in the original window. is this possible, and
> should it be in cucumber that I am testing this, or is it a lower-level
> test?

Cucumber has its own group now. Please post this to
http://groups.google.com/group/cukes

Cheers,
David

>
> Thanks,
> mBread
> --
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Asynchronous-requests-%28effectively-in-multiple-browser-windows%29-tp24167319p24167319.html
> Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From pj at crushlovely.com  Tue Jun 23 14:27:17 2009
From: pj at crushlovely.com (PJ Kelly)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 11:27:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Spec'ing the result of rescue_from
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906221543x1068deeehe035cc35ee2499da@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ca255124-f26e-41f7-97c9-bb392f8479fb@d7g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906221543x1068deeehe035cc35ee2499da@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7327761d-2709-4cd6-9c7f-ad337fe5bb23@q3g2000pra.googlegroups.com>

Hi David, thanks for the speedy response yesterday.  Much appreciated.

On Jun 22, 3:43?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> What's the failure message?

'MembersController GET process_step_2 should redirect to step_2'
FAILED
expected redirect to "http://test.host/application/step_2", got no
redirect

I did some more digging, and found a couple things.  When I try this
in the browser (by visiting /application/step_2/process) and look at
the development log, the request is actually being made to
ApplicationController#index:

Processing ApplicationController#index (for 127.0.0.1 at 2009-06-23
11:08:18) [GET]
Redirected to http://byassociation.local/application/step_2

However when the specs are run, the test log shows:

Processing MembersController#process_step_2 (for 208.77.188.166 at
2009-06-23 11:19:50) [GET]

I guess the question then, is that if this is how things are handled
when using rescue_from, how do I spec out that users are being
redirected to the right location?  Do you think the inconsistency
between the development test logs needs to be brought up with Rails
core?

Thanks in advance!

Best, PJ

From joe at pinkpucker.net  Tue Jun 23 18:15:05 2009
From: joe at pinkpucker.net (Joe Van Dyk)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:15:05 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] html::document errors
Message-ID: <c715e640906231515p2a8e813atf658b328450c329c@mail.gmail.com>

    And Joe should see a radio button representing the answer 'OJ'
 # features/step_definitions/trat_steps.rb:111
      uninitialized constant HTML::Document (NameError)
      /home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/matchers/method_missing.rb:6:in
`method_missing'
      /home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails/matchers/assert_select.rb:25:in
`__send__'
      /home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails/matchers/assert_select.rb:25:in
`matches?'
      /home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/expectations/handler.rb:11:in
`handle_matcher'
      /home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/expectations/extensions/kernel.rb:27:in
`should'
      ./features/step_definitions/trat_steps.rb:113:in `/should see a
radio button representing the answer '(.*)'/'
      features/trat/taking/answer_sheet.feature:53:in `And Joe should
see a radio button representing the answer 'OJ''


Any ideas?  Where's HTML::Document supposed to be defined?

Joe

From joe at pinkpucker.net  Tue Jun 23 18:43:15 2009
From: joe at pinkpucker.net (Joe Van Dyk)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:43:15 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] html::document errors
In-Reply-To: <c715e640906231515p2a8e813atf658b328450c329c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c715e640906231515p2a8e813atf658b328450c329c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c715e640906231543m4088ac97q3a0ea251bbab6ca2@mail.gmail.com>

Oh, latest version of rspec and rspec-rails installed as a plugin.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Joe Van Dyk<joe at pinkpucker.net> wrote:
> ? ?And Joe should see a radio button representing the answer 'OJ'
> ?# features/step_definitions/trat_steps.rb:111
> ? ? ?uninitialized constant HTML::Document (NameError)
> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/matchers/method_missing.rb:6:in
> `method_missing'
> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails/matchers/assert_select.rb:25:in
> `__send__'
> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails/matchers/assert_select.rb:25:in
> `matches?'
> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/expectations/handler.rb:11:in
> `handle_matcher'
> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/expectations/extensions/kernel.rb:27:in
> `should'
> ? ? ?./features/step_definitions/trat_steps.rb:113:in `/should see a
> radio button representing the answer '(.*)'/'
> ? ? ?features/trat/taking/answer_sheet.feature:53:in `And Joe should
> see a radio button representing the answer 'OJ''
>
>
> Any ideas? ?Where's HTML::Document supposed to be defined?
>
> Joe
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Jun 23 20:15:17 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 19:15:17 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] spec_server is dead! Long live spork!
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906231715t53f3331cn67fada3c7dda3efa@mail.gmail.com>

Hey all,

Just a heads up that the rspec-rails-1.2.7.1 release deprecates
spec_server in favor of Tim Harper's spork gem.

  http://github.com/timcharper/spork

I've already removed spec_server from the rspec-rails git repo, so it
will no longer be part of the rspec-rails gem beginning with the next
release. I understand that this presents a conundrum for folks on
Windows, as there is no spork love for Windows just yet. To that end,
I've posted the spec_server to its own repo on github:

  http://github.com/dchelimsky/spec_server

As the readme suggests, I do not plan to maintain this. It is posted
solely for the purpose of making it easily accessible for those who
want to (or don't have other options yet) continue to use it.
Admittedly, I didn't go very far to make it a single command install
or a gem, so if anybody cares to take that on I'm sure it would be
appreciated by many.

Cheers,
David

From brian.takita at gmail.com  Tue Jun 23 21:45:30 2009
From: brian.takita at gmail.com (Brian Takita)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:45:30 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] spec_server is dead! Long live spork!
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906231715t53f3331cn67fada3c7dda3efa@mail.gmail.com>
References: <57c63afe0906231715t53f3331cn67fada3c7dda3efa@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1d7ddd110906231845n4eb7b38fsa17718d50d8ff548@mail.gmail.com>

Huhzah!

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:15 PM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Just a heads up that the rspec-rails-1.2.7.1 release deprecates
> spec_server in favor of Tim Harper's spork gem.
>
> ?http://github.com/timcharper/spork
>
> I've already removed spec_server from the rspec-rails git repo, so it
> will no longer be part of the rspec-rails gem beginning with the next
> release. I understand that this presents a conundrum for folks on
> Windows, as there is no spork love for Windows just yet. To that end,
> I've posted the spec_server to its own repo on github:
>
> ?http://github.com/dchelimsky/spec_server
>
> As the readme suggests, I do not plan to maintain this. It is posted
> solely for the purpose of making it easily accessible for those who
> want to (or don't have other options yet) continue to use it.
> Admittedly, I didn't go very far to make it a single command install
> or a gem, so if anybody cares to take that on I'm sure it would be
> appreciated by many.
>
> Cheers,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From yoann.zimero at gmail.com  Tue Jun 23 21:13:57 2009
From: yoann.zimero at gmail.com (Yoann-Z)
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 18:13:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] undefined method `blueprint' with
	rspec/machinist/faker
Message-ID: <2ba73627-1b4d-439d-9927-ea2e23bd72ec@o5g2000prh.googlegroups.com>

Hi,

I just started using Machinist for my project. So I successfully
installed notahat-machinist and faker gems and as soon as I run a spec
I get the following error :

/usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activerecord-2.3.2/lib/active_record/
base.rb:1964:in `method_missing': undefined method `blueprint' for
#<Class:0xb7a23a98> (NoMethodError)

Can you help me please?

Thank you by advance.
-Yoann-Z

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Wed Jun 24 08:58:24 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Tom Hoen)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:58:24 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] any idea why spec_server gets 'cannot remove
	Object' error?
In-Reply-To: <d7694cfb7b42f4940e9bec73b1b4e1b7@ruby-forum.com>
References: <7df13a180210246a40d87100c25a9e7d@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906230719t211872abm67200c5aa1d22d5c@mail.gmail.com>
	<d7694cfb7b42f4940e9bec73b1b4e1b7@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <a3dea1b76295cae41804abcae62ba687@ruby-forum.com>

Tom Hoen wrote:

In order to suss out what might be cause, i modified the remove_constant 
method in the LoadingModule class 
'\ruby\lib\ruby\gems\1.8\gems\activesupport-2.3.2\lib\active_support\dependencies.rb', 
adding in begin/rescue/end statements.

    def remove_constant(const) #:nodoc:
begin
      return false unless qualified_const_defined? const

      const = $1 if /\A::(.*)\Z/ =~ const.to_s
      names = const.to_s.split('::')
      if names.size == 1 # It's under Object
        parent = Object
      else
        parent = (names[0..-2] * '::').constantize
      end

      log "removing constant #{const}"
      parent.instance_eval { remove_const names.last }
      return true
rescue
      log 'error when removing constant #{const}'
end
    end


This seems to allow the spec_server to operate properly, but I honestly 
don't know what repercussions it may cause.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From yoann.zimero at gmail.com  Wed Jun 24 13:35:41 2009
From: yoann.zimero at gmail.com (Yoann-Z)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 10:35:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] undefined method `blueprint' with
	rspec/machinist/faker
In-Reply-To: <ecbf28ec0906240338l2d04aaachd54a939e092af143@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2ba73627-1b4d-439d-9927-ea2e23bd72ec@o5g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
	<ecbf28ec0906240338l2d04aaachd54a939e092af143@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f7693851-52ff-4c49-b333-046122a3b612@d7g2000prl.googlegroups.com>

Hi,

Thank you for your reply.
I found the answer elsewhere this morning.

I had to require Machinist and Sham in the file blueprints.rb :

  require 'machinist/active_record'
  require 'sham'

It works fine right now.

Thank you very much
-Yoann-Z

From timcharper at gmail.com  Wed Jun 24 19:06:25 2009
From: timcharper at gmail.com (Tim Harper)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:06:25 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] any idea why spec_server gets 'cannot remove
	Object' error?
In-Reply-To: <d7694cfb7b42f4940e9bec73b1b4e1b7@ruby-forum.com>
References: <7df13a180210246a40d87100c25a9e7d@ruby-forum.com> 
	<57c63afe0906230719t211872abm67200c5aa1d22d5c@mail.gmail.com> 
	<d7694cfb7b42f4940e9bec73b1b4e1b7@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <e1a5e9a00906241606nca0db09y17248c1b1d40289a@mail.gmail.com>

There is no voting love on the windows feature request:

http://github.com/timcharper/spork/issues
:)

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:38 AM, Tom Hoen <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:

> David - Thank you for responding.
>
>
>
> >
> > Previously to what? What changed?
> >
>
>
> The only changes were some additional models/controllers and specs for
> both, and I installed and used (in one of the models) open_ssl. My plan
> it to revert until I find a point at which things start to work again,
> unless someone has a better idea.
>
>
> >
> > gem install spork
> > cd path/to/project
> > spork bootstrap --rspec
> > # edit spec/spec_helper.rb
> >
>
> Alas, I develop on Windows. So no spork. As of yet.
>
> Thanks for your advice.
> Tom
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090624/c3176369/attachment.html>

From rick.denatale at gmail.com  Wed Jun 24 19:54:35 2009
From: rick.denatale at gmail.com (Rick DeNatale)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 19:54:35 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Running RSpec under MultiRuby
Message-ID: <deb2337a0906241654m31fc1935p4773a696403c6086@mail.gmail.com>

I just published a quick article showing how to use the patch I
provided and David just release in RSpec 1.2.7 to run your specs using
multiruby:

http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/2009/06/24/rspec-meet-multiruby

-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From luislavena at gmail.com  Wed Jun 24 20:18:28 2009
From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 21:18:28 -0300
Subject: [rspec-users] Running RSpec under MultiRuby
In-Reply-To: <deb2337a0906241654m31fc1935p4773a696403c6086@mail.gmail.com>
References: <deb2337a0906241654m31fc1935p4773a696403c6086@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <71166b3b0906241718o3e9a3afdvdafc61f2812c1bcb@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Rick DeNatale<rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:
> I just published a quick article showing how to use the patch I
> provided and David just release in RSpec 1.2.7 to run your specs using
> multiruby:
>
> http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/2009/06/24/rspec-meet-multiruby
>

Tried to leave you this comment:

I have setup 'mr' as alias for multiruby, so I can do

mr -S rake spec

Which is going to produce the exact same results than your task
(without inject system calls for which).

Also, going with above example, this will work on Windows too, using Pik:

pik run "rake spec"

-- 
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry

From rick.denatale at gmail.com  Wed Jun 24 22:24:26 2009
From: rick.denatale at gmail.com (Rick DeNatale)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 22:24:26 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Running RSpec under MultiRuby
In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0906241718o3e9a3afdvdafc61f2812c1bcb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <deb2337a0906241654m31fc1935p4773a696403c6086@mail.gmail.com>
	<71166b3b0906241718o3e9a3afdvdafc61f2812c1bcb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deb2337a0906241924s62c80641p94b76eaaf6498890@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Luis Lavena<luislavena at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Rick DeNatale<rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I just published a quick article showing how to use the patch I
>> provided and David just release in RSpec 1.2.7 to run your specs using
>> multiruby:
>>
>> http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/2009/06/24/rspec-meet-multiruby
>>
>
> Tried to leave you this comment:
>
> I have setup 'mr' as alias for multiruby, so I can do
>
> mr -S rake spec

As far as I can tell, this requires that you install rake in all the
various multiruby setups.

But the real reason I went the way I did was that it allows other rake
tasks to depend on the multiruby rspec tasks without requiring ALL
rake tests to run under multiruby.

-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From luislavena at gmail.com  Thu Jun 25 00:15:32 2009
From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 01:15:32 -0300
Subject: [rspec-users] Running RSpec under MultiRuby
In-Reply-To: <deb2337a0906241924s62c80641p94b76eaaf6498890@mail.gmail.com>
References: <deb2337a0906241654m31fc1935p4773a696403c6086@mail.gmail.com> 
	<71166b3b0906241718o3e9a3afdvdafc61f2812c1bcb@mail.gmail.com> 
	<deb2337a0906241924s62c80641p94b76eaaf6498890@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <71166b3b0906242115w205df1f5u90e3bb134ab6a5@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Rick DeNatale<rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Luis Lavena<luislavena at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Rick DeNatale<rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I just published a quick article showing how to use the patch I
>>> provided and David just release in RSpec 1.2.7 to run your specs using
>>> multiruby:
>>>
>>> http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/2009/06/24/rspec-meet-multiruby
>>>
>>
>> Tried to leave you this comment:
>>
>> I have setup 'mr' as alias for multiruby, so I can do
>>
>> mr -S rake spec
>
> As far as I can tell, this requires that you install rake in all the
> various multiruby setups.
>

Yes, but that should be true for environment isolation since different
versions of ruby behave in different ways, add to the mix the Gems and
you have a Molotov coctail on your hands ;-)

But you can use multiruby_setup rubygems:merge

Which should symlink the rubygems installations of your different ruby
versions and get those shared.

(beware of gems with native extensions and having ruby 1.8 and 1.9
with multiruby).

> But the real reason I went the way I did was that it allows other rake
> tasks to depend on the multiruby rspec tasks without requiring ALL
> rake tests to run under multiruby.

But that is kind of cheating.

Let say I have only 1.9 on my system, I checkout a project and try to
get the list of task of that project with rake -T

Now, since I was not testing 100% against Ruby 1.9, I never found that
one of the gems I depend on (let's say Hoe) was not 1.9 compatible.

Then I get people complaining about my project not working with Ruby
1.9... but "it worked on my computer" you would say.

Anyhow, different approaches I believe, and in any case, is good to
know that RSpec now supports setting the ruby interpreter and not
leveraging on RUBY definition itself.

Thank you for the patch.
-- 
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Thu Jun 25 07:03:44 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Tom Hoen)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:03:44 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] any idea why spec_server gets 'cannot remove
	Object' error?
In-Reply-To: <e1a5e9a00906241606nca0db09y17248c1b1d40289a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7df13a180210246a40d87100c25a9e7d@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906230719t211872abm67200c5aa1d22d5c@mail.gmail.com>
	<d7694cfb7b42f4940e9bec73b1b4e1b7@ruby-forum.com>
	<e1a5e9a00906241606nca0db09y17248c1b1d40289a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e4667a8d14cbbd6652bc46e9ae7dba01@ruby-forum.com>

Tim Harper wrote:
> There is no voting love on the windows feature request:
> 
> http://github.com/timcharper/spork/issues
> :)

I tried to vote a +1, but get this after clicking the Comment button:

   There was a problem serving the requested page.

   Now you're wondering, "what can I do about it!?!". Well...


Have you heard of anyone that has rspec/spork/cucumber etc running under 
cygwin, colinux, andLinux, or Ulteo Virtual Desktop. Do any of them 
allow for fork?
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From rick.denatale at gmail.com  Thu Jun 25 12:13:09 2009
From: rick.denatale at gmail.com (Rick DeNatale)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:13:09 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Running RSpec under MultiRuby
In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0906242115w205df1f5u90e3bb134ab6a5@mail.gmail.com>
References: <deb2337a0906241654m31fc1935p4773a696403c6086@mail.gmail.com>
	<71166b3b0906241718o3e9a3afdvdafc61f2812c1bcb@mail.gmail.com>
	<deb2337a0906241924s62c80641p94b76eaaf6498890@mail.gmail.com>
	<71166b3b0906242115w205df1f5u90e3bb134ab6a5@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <deb2337a0906250913j66117cb5t1ba260f803fe741f@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Luis Lavena<luislavena at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Rick DeNatale<rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:18 PM, Luis Lavena<luislavena at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Rick DeNatale<rick.denatale at gmail.com> wrote:

>> But the real reason I went the way I did was that it allows other rake
>> tasks to depend on the multiruby rspec tasks without requiring ALL
>> rake tests to run under multiruby.
>
> But that is kind of cheating.
>
> Let say I have only 1.9 on my system, I checkout a project and try to
> get the list of task of that project with rake -T
>
> Now, since I was not testing 100% against Ruby 1.9, I never found that
> one of the gems I depend on (let's say Hoe) was not 1.9 compatible.

I think that hoe is a good example of when 1.9 compatibility is
optional.  Hoe is only used to deploy the gem to rubyforge... It
doesn't affect the compatibility of the gem being released.

And the rake tasks I'm thinking of are things like having a
deploy/publish task which pre-regs running the specs for the thing
being deployed and making sure they run under multiruby as a pre-req
to deployment/publication.

I this case you want to be able to run only the specs under multiruby,
not the whole deployment/publication task, which would (try) to
deploy/publish 2/3/4 times depending on how many ruby installations
you have set up for multiruby.

-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From marekj.com at gmail.com  Thu Jun 25 15:47:30 2009
From: marekj.com at gmail.com (marekj)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:47:30 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] When spec/test/unit is used then TestUnit Console
	Runner.run TestCase does not run testcases
Message-ID: <ad6790aa0906251247i59693a95l29e73eb598452cfd@mail.gmail.com>

Hi, I have some old test/unit testcases (used for browser acceptance
tests) that I want to convert to rspec.
I first started converting assertions to matchers  and my tests ran
fine using TestRunner.run method

1) Here is my test that works when Spec::Matchers were added to TestUnit only

require 'test/unit'
require 'spec/expectations'
class Test::Unit::TestCase
  include Spec::Matchers
end

class Test_spec < Test::Unit::TestCase
  def test_a
    'a'.should == 'a'
  end
end

# TestRunner
require 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner'
puts "before runner some code"
Test::Unit::UI::Console::TestRunner.run Test_spec
puts "after runner some code"

The reason I use TestRunner is for some browser driving and desktop
cleanup and other non test stuff.
Then console runner runs testcase and I follow with some other code
(email, notifications etc...)

When I now started using 'spec/test/unit' the Console runner will not run tests.

2) here is the setup with 'spec/test/unit' that does not run

require 'spec/test/unit'
class Test_spec < Test::Unit::TestCase
  def test_a
    'a'.should == 'a'
  end
end

# This now will not run Test_spec class
require 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner'
puts "before runner"
Test::Unit::UI::Console::TestRunner.run Test_spec
puts "after runner"


== I use rspec 1.2.7 (with Ruby 1.8.6 on Windows)


Am I missing something?
I would appreciate feedback
Thanks.



marekj

Watirloo: Semantic Page Objects in UseCases
http://github.com/marekj/watirloo/

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Jun 25 15:55:23 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 14:55:23 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] When spec/test/unit is used then TestUnit Console
	Runner.run TestCase does not run testcases
In-Reply-To: <ad6790aa0906251247i59693a95l29e73eb598452cfd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ad6790aa0906251247i59693a95l29e73eb598452cfd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906251255k38306e2aj8a6b88d7c60ca6eb@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 2:47 PM, marekj<marekj.com at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, I have some old test/unit testcases (used for browser acceptance
> tests) that I want to convert to rspec.
> I first started converting assertions to matchers ?and my tests ran
> fine using TestRunner.run method
>
> 1) Here is my test that works when Spec::Matchers were added to TestUnit only
>
> require 'test/unit'
> require 'spec/expectations'
> class Test::Unit::TestCase
> ?include Spec::Matchers
> end
>
> class Test_spec < Test::Unit::TestCase
> ?def test_a
> ? ?'a'.should == 'a'
> ?end
> end
>
> # TestRunner
> require 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner'
> puts "before runner some code"
> Test::Unit::UI::Console::TestRunner.run Test_spec
> puts "after runner some code"
>
> The reason I use TestRunner is for some browser driving and desktop
> cleanup and other non test stuff.
> Then console runner runs testcase and I follow with some other code
> (email, notifications etc...)
>
> When I now started using 'spec/test/unit' the Console runner will not run tests.
>
> 2) here is the setup with 'spec/test/unit' that does not run
>
> require 'spec/test/unit'
> class Test_spec < Test::Unit::TestCase
> ?def test_a
> ? ?'a'.should == 'a'
> ?end
> end
>
> # This now will not run Test_spec class
> require 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner'
> puts "before runner"
> Test::Unit::UI::Console::TestRunner.run Test_spec
> puts "after runner"
>
>
> == I use rspec 1.2.7 (with Ruby 1.8.6 on Windows)
>
>
> Am I missing something?

This is by design. When you run with RSpec, RSpec takes over the run,
taking test/unit's runner out of the picture. Sorry I can't give you a
better answer, except to say that future versions of RSpec may not
suffer this problem. But that's a few months off (at least), and just
a gleam in my eye.

Cheers,
David

> I would appreciate feedback
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> marekj
>
> Watirloo: Semantic Page Objects in UseCases
> http://github.com/marekj/watirloo/
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From marekj.com at gmail.com  Thu Jun 25 16:14:16 2009
From: marekj.com at gmail.com (marekj)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:14:16 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] When spec/test/unit is used then TestUnit Console
	Runner.run TestCase does not run testcases
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906251255k38306e2aj8a6b88d7c60ca6eb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ad6790aa0906251247i59693a95l29e73eb598452cfd@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906251255k38306e2aj8a6b88d7c60ca6eb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ad6790aa0906251314r533e7f0ja08f71aac4479825@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 2:55 PM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 2:47 PM, marekj<marekj.com at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi, I have some old test/unit testcases (used for browser acceptance
>> tests) that I want to convert to rspec.
>> I first started converting assertions to matchers ?and my tests ran
>> fine using TestRunner.run method
>>  ...snip...
>>
>> 2) here is the setup with 'spec/test/unit' that does not run
>>
>> require 'spec/test/unit'
>> class Test_spec < Test::Unit::TestCase
>> ?def test_a
>> ? ?'a'.should == 'a'
>> ?end
>> end
>>
>> # This now will not run Test_spec class
>> require 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner'
>> puts "before runner"
>> Test::Unit::UI::Console::TestRunner.run Test_spec
>> puts "after runner"
>>
>>
>> Am I missing something?
>
> This is by design. When you run with RSpec, RSpec takes over the run,
> taking test/unit's runner out of the picture. Sorry I can't give you a
> better answer, except to say that future versions of RSpec may not
> suffer this problem. But that's a few months off (at least), and just
> a gleam in my eye.
>
> Cheers,
> David

Thanks David,
And is there another mechanism I could use from Rspec that explicitly
calls TestCase or ExampleGroup class?
I just want to retain that mechanism of 'run some code then run tests
then run some code'
This is for Watir Browser tests so I have workflow setup code that
then drives test cases

Thanks again
marekj

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Jun 25 16:33:07 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 15:33:07 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] When spec/test/unit is used then TestUnit Console
	Runner.run TestCase does not run testcases
In-Reply-To: <ad6790aa0906251314r533e7f0ja08f71aac4479825@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ad6790aa0906251247i59693a95l29e73eb598452cfd@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906251255k38306e2aj8a6b88d7c60ca6eb@mail.gmail.com>
	<ad6790aa0906251314r533e7f0ja08f71aac4479825@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906251333kd82eebcod2304cdad67ab8e@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 3:14 PM, marekj<marekj.com at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 2:55 PM, David Chelimsky<dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 2:47 PM, marekj<marekj.com at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi, I have some old test/unit testcases (used for browser acceptance
>>> tests) that I want to convert to rspec.
>>> I first started converting assertions to matchers ?and my tests ran
>>> fine using TestRunner.run method
>>> ?...snip...
>>>
>>> 2) here is the setup with 'spec/test/unit' that does not run
>>>
>>> require 'spec/test/unit'
>>> class Test_spec < Test::Unit::TestCase
>>> ?def test_a
>>> ? ?'a'.should == 'a'
>>> ?end
>>> end
>>>
>>> # This now will not run Test_spec class
>>> require 'test/unit/ui/console/testrunner'
>>> puts "before runner"
>>> Test::Unit::UI::Console::TestRunner.run Test_spec
>>> puts "after runner"
>>>
>>>
>>> Am I missing something?
>>
>> This is by design. When you run with RSpec, RSpec takes over the run,
>> taking test/unit's runner out of the picture. Sorry I can't give you a
>> better answer, except to say that future versions of RSpec may not
>> suffer this problem. But that's a few months off (at least), and just
>> a gleam in my eye.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David
>
> Thanks David,
> And is there another mechanism I could use from Rspec that explicitly
> calls TestCase or ExampleGroup class?

Others have written custom runners before. It's not really optimized
for that but it's doable.

You may want to take a look at micronaut, which I believe is rspec and
test/unit compatible and hackable.

> I just want to retain that mechanism of 'run some code then run tests
> then run some code'
> This is for Watir Browser tests so I have workflow setup code that
> then drives test cases
>
> Thanks again
> marekj
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 26 08:37:18 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:37:18 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] mock object in array is getting size called on it
In-Reply-To: <50873a360906260513v5c927db0m60960ff197475fb1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50873a360906260513v5c927db0m60960ff197475fb1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906260537y4f31747ejbb33b944e1859466@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 7:13 AM, doug livesey<biot023 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, I have this code:
>
> ? def self.bulk_create_from_holly( params )
> ??? params.map do |param|
> ????? new( param )
> ??? end
> ? end
>
> That is testeb by this expectation:
>
> ??? it "should generate a new property with each set of params" do
> ????? [ @params, @properties ].transpose.each do |(param, property)|
> ??????? Property.should_receive( :new ).with( param ).and_return( property )
> ????? end
>
> ????? do_call
> ??? end
>
> In it, @params and @properties are of the same size (they are generated
> together). The objects in the @properties array are not mocked active record
> objects, but just plain old mocks (ie. mock( property1 ) ). This has to be
> so, as I am using a third party ar adapter that does not support the rails
> spec stubs & mocks.
> In the spec, I am simply trying to assert that a new property should be
> generated for each item in @params.
> However, I am getting this message when I run the expectation:
>
> NoMethodError in 'Property.bulk_create_from_holly( params ) should generate
> a new property with each set of params'
> undefined method `size' for
> #<Proc:0xb72721b4 at ./spec/models/property_spec.rb:49>
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/app/models/property.rb:20:in
> `bulk_create_from_holly'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/app/models/property.rb:19:in `map'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/app/models/property.rb:19:in
> `bulk_create_from_holly'
> ./spec/models/property_spec.rb:38:in `do_call'
> ./spec/models/property_spec.rb:52:
> ./script/spec:10:
>
> As you can see, nowhere do I call size(), and so can only think that this is
> some bizarre internal thing.

Why don't you debug it and find out where the call is coming from? If
you've updated to rspec-1.2.7  you can do this:

prop1 = mock(property1)
prop1.stub(:size) { puts caller(0)[1]; 37 }

Then at least we'll know what we're dealing with :)

> Or I'm being really dumb & missing something obvious.
> Can anyone spot where I'm going wrong, or maybe suggest a way around this?
> Cheers,
> ?? Doug.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 26 09:24:10 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:24:10 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] mock object in array is getting size called on it
In-Reply-To: <50873a360906260615r55c307ddob7078feb778b392f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50873a360906260513v5c927db0m60960ff197475fb1@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906260537y4f31747ejbb33b944e1859466@mail.gmail.com>
	<50873a360906260615r55c307ddob7078feb778b392f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906260624j28981a47ldd559ad24bdaf153@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 8:15 AM, doug livesey<biot023 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why don't you debug it and find out where the call is coming from?
>
> I get:
>
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:171:in
> `call'
>
> That block's a very useful feature I was unaware of! ;)

Yeah - it's in the release notes, but I should really blog about it.
Maybe next year :)

Anyhow - that's the code that's calling the block I asked you to put
in there :) Doesn't help much - try going back a few frames in the
stack:

prop1 = mock(property1)
prop1.stub(:size) { puts caller(0)[1..5]; 37 }




> ?? Doug.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 26 09:34:35 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:34:35 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] mock object in array is getting size called on it
In-Reply-To: <50873a360906260630s17231e77s1df86e68daaf35e9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50873a360906260513v5c927db0m60960ff197475fb1@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906260537y4f31747ejbb33b944e1859466@mail.gmail.com>
	<50873a360906260615r55c307ddob7078feb778b392f@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906260624j28981a47ldd559ad24bdaf153@mail.gmail.com>
	<50873a360906260630s17231e77s1df86e68daaf35e9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906260634h13934ddet4d75f8e57d891a03@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 8:30 AM, doug livesey<biot023 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Copying that (a-la monkey see, monkey do), I get:
>
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:171:in
> `call'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:171:in
> `invoke_return_block'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:122:in
> `invoke'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/proxy.rb:99:in
> `message_received'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/proxy.rb:142:in
> `size'

Ah - so close!!!!!! Try [1..10] - I'm pretty sure that the next line
will reveal our culprit, as that will show the code that is actually
calling the size method.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 26 09:59:38 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:59:38 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] html::document errors
In-Reply-To: <c715e640906231543m4088ac97q3a0ea251bbab6ca2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c715e640906231515p2a8e813atf658b328450c329c@mail.gmail.com>
	<c715e640906231543m4088ac97q3a0ea251bbab6ca2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906260659t2ac55b9al587c63d1d0c6b464@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Joe Van Dyk<joe at pinkpucker.net> wrote:
> Oh, latest version of rspec and rspec-rails installed as a plugin.
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:15 PM, Joe Van Dyk<joe at pinkpucker.net> wrote:
>> ? ?And Joe should see a radio button representing the answer 'OJ'
>> ?# features/step_definitions/trat_steps.rb:111
>> ? ? ?uninitialized constant HTML::Document (NameError)
>> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/matchers/method_missing.rb:6:in
>> `method_missing'
>> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails/matchers/assert_select.rb:25:in
>> `__send__'
>> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec-rails/lib/spec/rails/matchers/assert_select.rb:25:in
>> `matches?'

This is using rspec's have_tag matcher. I'd strongly recommend
installing webrat and using it's have_selector matcher instead.

Cheers,
David


>> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/expectations/handler.rb:11:in
>> `handle_matcher'
>> ? ? ?/home/joe/projects/cisv/vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/expectations/extensions/kernel.rb:27:in
>> `should'
>> ? ? ?./features/step_definitions/trat_steps.rb:113:in `/should see a
>> radio button representing the answer '(.*)'/'
>> ? ? ?features/trat/taking/answer_sheet.feature:53:in `And Joe should
>> see a radio button representing the answer 'OJ''
>>
>>
>> Any ideas? ?Where's HTML::Document supposed to be defined?
>>
>> Joe
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 26 10:03:36 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:03:36 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Spec'ing the result of rescue_from
In-Reply-To: <7327761d-2709-4cd6-9c7f-ad337fe5bb23@q3g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
References: <ca255124-f26e-41f7-97c9-bb392f8479fb@d7g2000prl.googlegroups.com>
	<57c63afe0906221543x1068deeehe035cc35ee2499da@mail.gmail.com>
	<7327761d-2709-4cd6-9c7f-ad337fe5bb23@q3g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906260703tafb20ataafb5eee6c5df3b3@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 1:27 PM, PJ Kelly<pj at crushlovely.com> wrote:
> Hi David, thanks for the speedy response yesterday. ?Much appreciated.
>
> On Jun 22, 3:43?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> What's the failure message?
>
> 'MembersController GET process_step_2 should redirect to step_2'
> FAILED
> expected redirect to "http://test.host/application/step_2", got no
> redirect
>
> I did some more digging, and found a couple things. ?When I try this
> in the browser (by visiting /application/step_2/process) and look at
> the development log, the request is actually being made to
> ApplicationController#index:
>
> Processing ApplicationController#index (for 127.0.0.1 at 2009-06-23
> 11:08:18) [GET]
> Redirected to http://byassociation.local/application/step_2
>
> However when the specs are run, the test log shows:
>
> Processing MembersController#process_step_2 (for 208.77.188.166 at
> 2009-06-23 11:19:50) [GET]
>
> I guess the question then, is that if this is how things are handled
> when using rescue_from, how do I spec out that users are being
> redirected to the right location? ?Do you think the inconsistency
> between the development test logs needs to be brought up with Rails
> core?

You've got a route named application :) I'm sure that's where the
confusion lies, though I'm not convinced of where the problem lies.

What are the controllers and models actually called? What version of
rails, rspec, etc?

>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Best, PJ
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 26 10:08:28 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:08:28 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Expected output matches rendered output but still
	getting error in view spec
In-Reply-To: <4A3FF978.6000504@dirtyalpaca.com>
References: <4A3FF978.6000504@dirtyalpaca.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906260708g23dd1f15o91a5e83128f79d5a@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Anthony Burns<anthony.h.burns at gmail.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hello all,
>
> I've just gotten started using BDD with RSpec/Cucumber/Webrat and
> Rails and I've run into some frustration trying to get my view spec to
> pass.
>
> First of all, I am running Ruby 1.9.1p129 with Rails 2.3.2, RSpec and
> RSpec-Rails 1.2.6, Cucumber 0.3.11, and Webrat 0.4.4.
>
> Here is the code relevant to my question
>
> config/routes.rb:
>
> ? ?map.b_posts ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?'backend/posts',
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?:controller => 'backend/
> posts',
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?:action => 'backend_index',
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :conditions => { :method
> => :get }
>
> ? ?map.connect ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?'backend/posts',
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?:controller => 'backend/
> posts',
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :action => 'create',
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? :conditions => { :method
> => :post }
>
> views/backend/posts/create.html.erb:
>
> ? ?<% form_tag do %>
> ? ?<% end %>
>
> *spec/views/backend/posts/create.html.erb_spec.rb:*
>
> ? ?describe "backend/posts/create.html.erb" do
> ? ? ?it "should render a form to create a post" do
> ? ? ? ?render "backend/posts/create.html.erb"
> ? ? ? ?response.should have_selector("form", :method =>
> 'post', :action => b_posts_path) do |form|
> ? ? ? ? ?# Nothing here yet.
> ? ? ? ?end
> ? ? ?end
> ? ?end
>
> Here is the relevant part of the output when I run script/spec:
>
> 'backend/posts/create.html.erb should render a form to create a post'
> FAILED
> expected following output to contain a <form method='post' action='/
> backend/posts'/> tag:
> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://
> www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">
> <html><body><form action="/backend/posts" method="post">
> </form></body></html>
>
> It would appear to me that what have_selector is looking for is
> exactly what the template generates, yet the example still fails. I am
> very much looking forward to seeing my error (because I have a feeling
> it is my error). Any help is much appreciated!

That failure message is coming from webrat, and I'm not sure what's
really going wrong there. I'd recommend posting to the webrat group:
http://groups.google.com/group/webrat/

Cheers,
David

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Jun 26 10:44:31 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 09:44:31 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] mock object in array is getting size called on it
In-Reply-To: <50873a360906260736i15008cc1v4702fdf8d1f32d66@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50873a360906260513v5c927db0m60960ff197475fb1@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906260537y4f31747ejbb33b944e1859466@mail.gmail.com>
	<50873a360906260615r55c307ddob7078feb778b392f@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906260624j28981a47ldd559ad24bdaf153@mail.gmail.com>
	<50873a360906260630s17231e77s1df86e68daaf35e9@mail.gmail.com>
	<57c63afe0906260634h13934ddet4d75f8e57d891a03@mail.gmail.com>
	<50873a360906260736i15008cc1v4702fdf8d1f32d66@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906260744t480049a1jcc53cede71e5c315@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 9:36 AM, doug livesey<biot023 at gmail.com> wrote:
> That'll be:
>
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:171:in
> `call'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:171:in
> `invoke_return_block'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:122:in
> `invoke'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/proxy.rb:99:in
> `message_received'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/proxy.rb:142:in
> `size'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:162:in
> `invoke_consecutive_return_block'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/message_expectation.rb:120:in
> `invoke'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/proxy.rb:101:in
> `message_received'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/vendor/gems/rspec-1.2.7/lib/spec/mocks/proxy.rb:142:in
> `new'
> /home/doug/work/rails/neville/app/models/property.rb:20:in
> `bulk_create_from_holly'

This last line is where you should look, if you haven't already.

> Sorry for the delays -- keep getting called away into other things!
> & thanks,
> ?? Doug.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sat Jun 27 10:55:18 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Zhenning Guan)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:55:18 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] what does :save => true mean in mock_model ?
Message-ID: <82ec49075a42f7798cd179abb24e6e36@ruby-forum.com>

@weather  = mock_model(Weather, :id => "1")
@forecast = mock_model(Forecast, :weather => @weather, :save => true)

what's the different between with :save => true or without it?
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sat Jun 27 11:02:52 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 10:02:52 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] what does :save => true mean in mock_model ?
In-Reply-To: <82ec49075a42f7798cd179abb24e6e36@ruby-forum.com>
References: <82ec49075a42f7798cd179abb24e6e36@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906270802n584f8943v1e16625ee47ed7f6@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Zhenning Guan<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> @weather ?= mock_model(Weather, :id => "1")
> @forecast = mock_model(Forecast, :weather => @weather, :save => true)
>
> what's the different between with :save => true or without it?

The hash submitted to mock_model sets up method stubs:

@weather.save
=>  MockExpectationError "received unexpected message 'save'"
@forecast.save
=> true

HTH,
David
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sat Jun 27 11:21:15 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 10:21:15 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] RSpec not failing when requesting missing
	method/view
In-Reply-To: <24233965.post@talk.nabble.com>
References: <24233965.post@talk.nabble.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906270821x5e7d36c1s539316265ddc458e@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:14 AM, mBread<mbread at m-bread.com> wrote:
> I've got this test:
>
> describe LoginController do
>   describe "GET index" do
>     it "should be successful" do
>       get 'index'
>       response.should be_success
>     end
>   end
> end
>
> which passes, but a cucumber test fails on trying to get the index for
> LoginController, with the message:
>
> No action responded to index. Actions:
>
> This error happens in cucumber & on a manual test (with a 404 status in the
> headers) because the LoginController is empty & there is no index view for
> it, but I want a failing rspec test before I correct it, but it insists that
> it's getting a 200 status.
>
> Any ideas? Thanks

That is by design. RSpec is about spec'ing things in isolation,
whereas cucumber is about spec'ing things end to end. RSpec controller
specs are about *controllers*, not views, so the presence and/or
validity of a view should not impact the controller spec.

If you want to use controller specs to fail when your views are
missing, you can use the integrate_views directive:

describe LoginController do
  describe "GET index" do
    integrate_views
    it "should be successful" do
      get 'index'
      response.should be_success
    end
  end
end

That is available, but is not the rspec way.

HTH,
David

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sat Jun 27 11:52:53 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Zhenning Guan)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:52:53 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] what does :save => true mean in mock_model ?
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906270802n584f8943v1e16625ee47ed7f6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <82ec49075a42f7798cd179abb24e6e36@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906270802n584f8943v1e16625ee47ed7f6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d9eb15db6b124ad761cd7f25f852a875@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:

clear, thank you David
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sat Jun 27 11:55:43 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Zhenning Guan)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:55:43 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] what does :save => true mean in mock_model ?
In-Reply-To: <d9eb15db6b124ad761cd7f25f852a875@ruby-forum.com>
References: <82ec49075a42f7798cd179abb24e6e36@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906270802n584f8943v1e16625ee47ed7f6@mail.gmail.com>
	<d9eb15db6b124ad761cd7f25f852a875@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <fa1747ea054b515801132406763484fd@ruby-forum.com>

one more question.
Forecast.stub!(:new).and_return(@forecast)
Forecast.should_receive(:new).with(anything()).and_return(@forecast)

what's the different between stub! and should_receive ?
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sat Jun 27 12:15:52 2009
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 11:15:52 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] what does :save => true mean in mock_model ?
In-Reply-To: <fa1747ea054b515801132406763484fd@ruby-forum.com>
References: <82ec49075a42f7798cd179abb24e6e36@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906270802n584f8943v1e16625ee47ed7f6@mail.gmail.com>
	<d9eb15db6b124ad761cd7f25f852a875@ruby-forum.com>
	<fa1747ea054b515801132406763484fd@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <57c63afe0906270915j28443c06oe621d25fa46ea0cd@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Zhenning Guan<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> one more question.
> Forecast.stub!(:new).and_return(@forecast)
> Forecast.should_receive(:new).with(anything()).and_return(@forecast)
>
> what's the different between stub! and should_receive ?

Read this: http://rspec.info/documentation/mocks/ and then feel free
to ask questions about anything  you don't understand.

Cheers,
David

From mbread at m-bread.com  Sat Jun 27 12:20:25 2009
From: mbread at m-bread.com (mBread)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 09:20:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] RSpec not failing when requesting missing
 method/view
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906270821x5e7d36c1s539316265ddc458e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <24233965.post@talk.nabble.com>
	<57c63afe0906270821x5e7d36c1s539316265ddc458e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <24234411.post@talk.nabble.com>



David Chelimsky-2 wrote:
> 
> That is by design. RSpec is about spec'ing things in isolation,
> whereas cucumber is about spec'ing things end to end. RSpec controller
> specs are about *controllers*, not views, so the presence and/or
> validity of a view should not impact the controller spec.
> 

It was the 'no action responded to...' error, which I believe is to do with
methods existing in the controller, not the 'template is missing' error
regarding a missing view (I wasn't aware of the second one when I made the
first post). I didn't realise that error would disappear when a view exists
but no methods, so I see now that it is an integration issue, not a unit
issue. Thanks
-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/RSpec-not-failing-when-requesting-missing-method-view-tp24233965p24234411.html
Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


From orengolan at gmail.com  Sat Jun 27 18:00:58 2009
From: orengolan at gmail.com (oren)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 15:00:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <4A33CC56.9090406@benmabey.com>
References: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A3267F0.5080809@benmabey.com>
	<1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A33CC56.9090406@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <8d675deb-cd93-419b-ae10-3a7287671ebe@f19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>

Thank you so much Stephen.

I am ruby and rails beginner (created a simple site so far) that
decided to
dive into rspec and I feel the pains you described.

I decided to start new rails app and do it with rspec (and to only
test my models).

Is there a github project with rspec code that test the models?
it will be great to look at the examples before jumping to theory.
also, I just bought the book and it looks amazing.
Is it possible to only read the rspec parts and ignore the cucumber
parts?

Thanks again for the detailed post.  it really helps me understand
what I am getting into.


From orengolan at gmail.com  Sat Jun 27 18:05:45 2009
From: orengolan at gmail.com (oren)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 15:05:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A3267F0.5080809@benmabey.com>
	<1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <806df576-6c4c-41ff-800f-c217d11185e8@l12g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>

test

On Jun 12, 9:41?am, Stephen Eley <sfe... at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ben and Rick,
>
> Thanks very much to both of you for the encouraging responses. ?Your
> reply, Ben, came just in time as I was starting to wonder if I had
> made a complete and irrevocable ass of myself.
>
> On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 10:36 AM, Ben Mabey<b... at benmabey.com> wrote:
> > In general though I don't know if I
> > really see all of this as a problem specific to RSpec. ?The problem is that
> > many people coming to RSpec are not just RSpec novices but are in fact TDD
> > novices (and Rails, and Ruby novices too boot at times as well!).
>
> FWIW, I agree totally. ?In fact I re-read my message last night, and I
> want to retract one of my statements for sure: the statement that
> RSpec makes "some easy things easy, but other easy things very
> complicated."
>
> On deeper thought, I don't believe this is true. ?RSpec doesn't make
> anything harder than it already is. ?There's nothing _wrong_ with
> RSpec in this sense. ?I think a more incisive statement would be that
> with RSpec, some complicated things _feel like they should be easier._
> ?If only because other things feel so easy. ?And newbies tend to
> confront those problem areas at a point in the growth curve where the
> complexity can be misinterpreted as them Just Not Getting It. ?Some
> are driven off as a result.
>
> You're right about practice. ?You're right that bringing together too
> many learning curves at once creates interference patterns that
> shouldn't be blamed on RSpec. ?And Rick's reference to Martin Fowler's
> spiked learning curve -- "this is scary, this is nifty, WHOOPS I
> overdid it, this is okay in its place" -- is an excellent point.
>
> But I don't think it's totally out-of-bounds to frame it as an "RSpec
> problem," even if it isn't RSpec's fault. ?The thing is... ?Well...
> There are *opportunities* here. ?If RSpec -- along with its tools and
> resources and culture -- was a little better at some of this stuff,
> how much easier would it be to learn *everything else?*
>
> How many of us learned BDD at the same time we learned programming?
> ...Show of hands? ?Anyone? ?The only developers who could make that
> claim would have to be pretty fresh out of the pond. ?If that does
> apply to anyone reading this, please speak up -- I'd like to hear your
> thoughts on how you're doing.
>
> How many of us used TDD or BDD out of the gate when we learned Rails
> or Ruby? ?This is plausible, but I get the sense it's uncommon. ?Most
> of us don't even think to work on good testing practices until we
> believe we're getting the rest of the stuff down. ?I know I didn't.
>
> Formal education in programming doesn't help. ?Not by any evidence to
> my eyes. ?I've recently started seeing someone who's majoring in CS at
> a well-known university, and he said the first class he took on
> software design was in C. ?Frickin' *C*. ?_Then_ they did C++, and
> then Java, but there was nothing significant about testing. ?I told
> him about Cucumber and it made his heart go pitter-patter.
>
> The teaching resources for Rails and Ruby don't help. ?Just about
> every book makes a *nod* toward testing -- there's always a chapter,
> they always say "do this constantly" -- but the chapter's inevitably
> somewhere near the back, after everything else has been introduced.
> Rails culture is passionate about testing, but most of us don't start
> to tap into that culture until we're at 'Competent' or above.
>
> What if the world were different? ?What if teaching were different?
> What if the predominant lessons people used to get started with Rails
> *did not* start with "Type 'rails', make a scaffold, watch it fly!"
> but instead started with, "What's the most important single piece of
> information in your app? ?Okay, great. ?Write a spec like this. ?Now
> open up this file in /app/models.. ?[...] ?Your spec passed, you're
> cooking! ?Now let's spec a view so we can see that information... ?Now
> let's spec a controller to bring them together..."
>
> (Even better would be to start with Cucumber, which would take up very
> little extra overhead in that type of tutorial.)
>
> You get the gist. ?What if learning Rails was *all about* learning
> BDD? ?Would it make the Rails stuff easier to understand and develop
> competence faster? ?I hypothesize that it would.
>
> Some things need to be easier in BDD before we can get there. ?To me
> that means things need to be easier in RSpec. ?I believe my tutorial
> above would be easy enough to do today on the model side, but it's
> just too cumbersome to write a view or controller spec. ?You lose that
> "holy crap look how *fast* this is coming!" vibe which is so
> invigorating when you're doing something new. ?We could make that
> tutorial happen when writing a controller spec takes about as long as
> writing the controller *code.* ?There are some mitigators for this --
> the Shoulda macros may be great for this now that they work with RSpec
> -- but even so I think it's probably a little bit of wading into the
> swamp.
>
> I would like to see that world. ?I'd like to help *make* it. ?That
> college guy I'm dating has asked me about learning Rails -- but I'm
> planning to talk his ass off about Cucumber and RSpec before I agree
> to help him with code. ?I'm hoping he'll be my experiment to test my
> hypothesis, and I'll get a better sense of just how easy or hard it is
> to learn agile Web development if BDD happens at the ground floor.
>
> Given time, I think the patterns facilitated by RSpec could
> *completely* revolutionize the way software happens everywhere, *if*
> the next generation of developers come to learn it first and not as an
> "add-on." ?And that's why I'm picking on RSpec. ?I can't think of any
> other technology in a better position to make this happen, with only
> some moderate shifts of emphasis in both the tools and the culture.
>
> Does anyone else think that'd be pretty cool?
>
> --
> Have Fun,
> ? ?Steve Eley (sfe... at gmail.com)
> ? ?ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
> ? ?http://www.escapepod.org
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From orengolan at gmail.com  Sat Jun 27 18:01:17 2009
From: orengolan at gmail.com (oren)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 15:01:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <4A33CC56.9090406@benmabey.com>
References: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A3267F0.5080809@benmabey.com>
	<1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A33CC56.9090406@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <4bc8c2d5-3a0d-49cb-aa54-519618bfb734@h2g2000yqg.googlegroups.com>

Thank you so much Stephen.

I am ruby and rails beginner (created a simple site so far) that
decided to
dive into rspec and I feel the pains you described.

I decided to start new rails app and do it with rspec (and to only
test my models).

Is there a github project with rspec code that test the models?
it will be great to look at the examples before jumping to theory.
also, I just bought the book and it looks amazing.
Is it possible to only read the rspec parts and ignore the cucumber
parts?

Thanks again for the detailed post.  it really helps me understand
what I am getting into.


From orengolan at gmail.com  Sat Jun 27 18:29:48 2009
From: orengolan at gmail.com (oren)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 15:29:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] The problem with learning RSpec
In-Reply-To: <1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1fb4df0906111148h5967b00cy4a8ab47403c71797@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4A3267F0.5080809@benmabey.com>
	<1fb4df0906120941p6943b879nff94e8a6c07322b9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <39a49d9a-2993-4ae2-ab2c-50a25d5aa813@r33g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>

Thank you so much Stephen.

I am ruby and rails beginner (created a simple site so far) that
decided to
dive into rspec and I feel the pains you described.

I decided to start new rails app and do it with rspec (and to only
test my models).
is there a github project with rspec code that test the models?
it will be great to look at the examples before jumping to theory.

Also, I just bought 'the rspec book'.  Can I only read the rspec parts
and skip the cucumber parts
or it doesn't fit into the books structure and I must read it from
start to finish?


Thanks again for the detailed post.  it really helps me understand
what I am getting into.

From orengolan at gmail.com  Sat Jun 27 23:51:48 2009
From: orengolan at gmail.com (oren)
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:51:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing with activerecord at ThoughtWorks (Stubbing
	vs real DB)
Message-ID: <6b3d89e1-ce80-4e7d-b14b-2596d628f42d@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>

I am reading the post by Fowler, 'Ruby at ThoughtWorks'.
http://martinfowler.com/articl/rubyAtThoughtWorks.html#WasRubyTheRightChoice

He talks about testing with activerecord:

"Right at the beginning of our use of Ruby, there was a debate on how
best to organize testing in the presence of the Active Record database
layer in Rails. The basic problem is that most of the time,
performance of enterprise applications is dominated by database
access. We've found that by using a Test Double we can greatly speed
up our tests. Having fast tests is crucial to our test-intensive
development process. Kent Beck recommends a basic commit build of
under ten minutes. Most of our projects manage this these days, and
using a database double is a vital part of achieving it.

The problem with Active Record is that by combining database access
code with business logic, it's rather harder to create a database
double. The Mingle team's reaction to this was to accept that Rails
binds the database tightly and thus run all the commit tests against a
real database.

The contrary view was advocated most firmly by the Atlanta and Jersey
teams. Ruby has a powerful feature that allows you to redefine methods
at run-time. You can use this to take an active record class, and
redefine the the database access methods in that class as stubs. The
team started the gem unitrecord to help with this.

In the three years, we've not seen a generally accepted victor in this
debate. The Mingle team run a couple of thousand tests against a real
postgres database in around 8 minutes. (They parallelize the tests to
make use of multiple cores.) The Atlanta and Jersey teams consider it
valuable that their commit test runs in 2 minutes with stubs versus 8
minutes without. The trade-off is the simplicity of the direct
database tests versus the faster commit build of the stubbed tests.

While both teams are broadly happy with their positions in this
debate, the use of stubbing has led to another issue for the Atlanta/
Jersey teams. As the teams became familiar with using method stubbing,
they used it more and more - falling into the inevitable over-usage
where unit tests would stub out every method other than the one being
tested. The problem here, as often with using doubles, is brittle
tests. As you change the behavior of the application, you also have to
change lots of doubles that are mimicking the old behavior. This over-
usage has led both teams to move away from stubbed unit tests and to
use more rails-style functional tests with direct database access."

What do you think of the two tactics?
Also, What does it mean and where can I see examples of "running all
the commit tests against a real database" ?

Can I find it in "the rspec book" ?

Thanks!

From ben at benmabey.com  Sun Jun 28 02:34:26 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 00:34:26 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing with activerecord at ThoughtWorks
 (Stubbing vs real DB)
In-Reply-To: <6b3d89e1-ce80-4e7d-b14b-2596d628f42d@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
References: <6b3d89e1-ce80-4e7d-b14b-2596d628f42d@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <4A470EF2.8070006@benmabey.com>

oren wrote:
> I am reading the post by Fowler, 'Ruby at ThoughtWorks'.
> http://martinfowler.com/articl/rubyAtThoughtWorks.html#WasRubyTheRightChoice
>
> He talks about testing with activerecord:
>
> "Right at the beginning of our use of Ruby, there was a debate on how
> best to organize testing in the presence of the Active Record database
> layer in Rails. The basic problem is that most of the time,
> performance of enterprise applications is dominated by database
> access. We've found that by using a Test Double we can greatly speed
> up our tests. Having fast tests is crucial to our test-intensive
> development process. Kent Beck recommends a basic commit build of
> under ten minutes. Most of our projects manage this these days, and
> using a database double is a vital part of achieving it.
>
> The problem with Active Record is that by combining database access
> code with business logic, it's rather harder to create a database
> double. The Mingle team's reaction to this was to accept that Rails
> binds the database tightly and thus run all the commit tests against a
> real database.
>
> The contrary view was advocated most firmly by the Atlanta and Jersey
> teams. Ruby has a powerful feature that allows you to redefine methods
> at run-time. You can use this to take an active record class, and
> redefine the the database access methods in that class as stubs. The
> team started the gem unitrecord to help with this.
>
> In the three years, we've not seen a generally accepted victor in this
> debate. The Mingle team run a couple of thousand tests against a real
> postgres database in around 8 minutes. (They parallelize the tests to
> make use of multiple cores.) The Atlanta and Jersey teams consider it
> valuable that their commit test runs in 2 minutes with stubs versus 8
> minutes without. The trade-off is the simplicity of the direct
> database tests versus the faster commit build of the stubbed tests.
>
> While both teams are broadly happy with their positions in this
> debate, the use of stubbing has led to another issue for the Atlanta/
> Jersey teams. As the teams became familiar with using method stubbing,
> they used it more and more - falling into the inevitable over-usage
> where unit tests would stub out every method other than the one being
> tested. The problem here, as often with using doubles, is brittle
> tests. As you change the behavior of the application, you also have to
> change lots of doubles that are mimicking the old behavior. This over-
> usage has led both teams to move away from stubbed unit tests and to
> use more rails-style functional tests with direct database access."
>
> What do you think of the two tactics?
>   

I have done both on past projects.  I did not use any of the TW gems to 
do it.  I used Avdi Grimm's nice NullDB plugin to do it.  IMO it is a 
much better and cleaner approach than the ones talked about in the 
article.  I gave a lightning talk about the tradeoffs of both approaches 
and how I used NullDB in my project.  Here are the slides for the talk:
http://www.slideshare.net/bmabey/disconnecting-the-database-with-activerecord

The slides go through the benefits and tradeoffs of both approaches.  
Let me know if you want me to elaborate on anything else.  I should 
point out that another, but less extreme, solution to stubbing out the 
DB is to use an in-memory DB (like sqllite) to get a speed boost.  With 
this approach you may still need to switch to your real DB adapter for 
DB specific SQL but it all the basic AR stuff with work just fine.
> Also, What does it mean and where can I see examples of "running all
> the commit tests against a real database" ?
>   

Sounds like they have configured there project to to allow you to hot 
swap which strategy to use.  So, for development you can use the 
stubbing approach and get faster feedback and then swap in the real 
database on the CI server to make sure there aren't any surprises when 
it is actually executed against the DB.  This is a good approach and can 
be done quite easily with NullDB.
> Can I find it in "the rspec book" ?
>   
I don't think so.  To be honest, I don't think it is done that much.  I 
think most teams just let there model tests hit the DB. (And thus are 
not "real" unit tests by some people's definition....)


-Ben

From win at wincent.com  Sun Jun 28 08:07:28 2009
From: win at wincent.com (Wincent Colaiuta)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:07:28 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Test doubles: expect "x" and don't care about
	anything else
Message-ID: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>

I've had one of my recurring doubts about test doubles come up again.

The full post is here but I'll abbreviate the content in this message  
in any case:

   https://wincent.com/blog/thinking-about-switching-to-rr

Basically, in one of my controller specs I wanted to verify that the  
following line was being called and doing the right thing:
   @comment = Comment.find params[:id]
I had a mock for this set up, but it broke when unrelated code in the  
model was modified (a complex callback which itself called  
Comment.find).

The problems were as follows:

   - A mock was more than I really needed, as I didn't want to go  
through the complication of returning a substitute object.

   - The expectation set on the mock was too strict, because the other  
message send to Comment.find, the one I didn't care about, was  
triggering a failure.

   - A proxy would suffice, because all I really wanted to confirm was  
that the "find" message was sent, without actually interfering with  
the returned object.

   - I basically wanted to set an expectation "that this class will  
receive this message with these params", but the frameworks didn't  
allow me to do that because in reality you can only assert "that this  
class will receive this message with these params _and not receive  
that message with any other params at any time_"

In my blog post I detailed the possible options for avoiding the  
problem, and the easiest ended up being: forget mocks and proxies  
entirely and instead test the side-effect (that the expected object  
ends up getting assigned to the "@comment" instance variable).

So the workaround worked, but RSpec's own mock framework, and from  
what I can tell, the alternatives such as Mocha, RR et al, wouldn't  
really let me make the kind of assertion that I wanted to make: ie.  
"confirm this message gets sent at some point, but don't modify the  
behaviour at all, and don't interfere with or worry about any other  
messages that get sent to the object, including messages sent to the  
method that I'm setting the expectation on".

In my ideal test-double framework, I'd like to really assert two  
things about the line of code in question:

   1. That Comment.find gets called with a specific param at some  
point in time.
   2. That the @comment instance variable gets the expected value  
assigned to it.

I literally don't care about what other messages get sent to Comment,  
nor about other places in the code where Comment.find might get called  
with other parameters, and in any case I don't want to actually modify  
the behaviour or substitute my own return values. But it seems I can't  
do this with existing test double frameworks, and it makes it hard to  
write minimal specs with one expectation and as few test doubles as  
possible (ideally zero or one) per "it" block.

Ideally I'd want to write something like:

   it 'should find the comment' do
     proxy(Comment).find(@comment.id.to_s)
     do_put
   end

   it 'should assign to the @comment instance variable' do
     assigns[:comment].should == @comment
     do_put
   end

Note that with the "proxy" syntax above I'm trying to say:

   - I expect this message and these params to be sent at some point

   - I don't care if other messages are sent

   - I don't even care if the "find" method is also called with  
different params

   - I don't care about the order of the messages

   - I don't want to interfere with or substitute the return value

I don't know whether the syntax is adequate, or whether some keyword  
other than "proxy" would be required. Another alternative I thought of  
was:

   it 'should find the comment' do
     spy(Comment)
     do_put
     Comment.should have_received.find(@comment.id.to_s)
   end

Or similar... Basically saying that I want the double framework to spy  
(proxy _and_ record) all messages to the specified receiver, and that  
afterwards I'm going to retrospectively check that among the recorded  
messages is the one I'm looking for.

What do other people think?

   - is what I'm wanting to do a reasonable approach?

   - are there any test double frameworks out there which would allow  
me to work in this way?

Cheers,
Wincent


From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sun Jun 28 10:32:57 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Jesse Crockett)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 16:32:57 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Integrate or isolate views?
Message-ID: <c97aaf3f7eda7ffd41d2f28fac172bbd@ruby-forum.com>

Hello,

I've been trying for two years to pick up BDD.  I'm making progress,
have just read through the chapters in The RSpec Book on spec'ing views
and controllers.

What is the difference between using integrate_views and doing what
seems to be a lot of extra work to test the views in isolation?

When I use integrate_views, can I write view spec in what would
otherwise be isolated controller spec?

I read that I'm "encouraged" to do these in isolation, but IMHO the
chapter on spec'ing views is not very convincing in its own right, it
tells me that it's good, but doesn't show me as much, compared to the
examples and descriptions of circumstance that make several other
chapters very convincing.

Please help.  thanks

Jesse
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From ben at benmabey.com  Sun Jun 28 13:27:15 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:27:15 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Integrate or isolate views?
In-Reply-To: <c97aaf3f7eda7ffd41d2f28fac172bbd@ruby-forum.com>
References: <c97aaf3f7eda7ffd41d2f28fac172bbd@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <03369D62-AD08-4922-8D43-8289506E9AAC@benmabey.com>


On Jun 28, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Jesse Crockett wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I've been trying for two years to pick up BDD.  I'm making progress,
> have just read through the chapters in The RSpec Book on spec'ing  
> views
> and controllers.
>
> What is the difference between using integrate_views and doing what
> seems to be a lot of extra work to test the views in isolation?
>
> When I use integrate_views, can I write view spec in what would
> otherwise be isolated controller spec?

Correct, by default RSpec's controller specs will not render the  
view.  This allows you to test the controller and view in complete  
isolation.  By turning on integrate_views you can specify what the  
rendered view should contain at the same time.  If you were to do  
outside-in dev starting from the view you would start out by writing  
an isolated view spec.  That spec would say that such and such would  
be displayed.  This would in turn prompt you to assign something to  
that view for it to be rendered.  That is then your signal that the  
controller needs to assign that object.  So, you go up a level and  
make sure that the controller action is assigning the needed object  
for the view.  That object will most likely have to answer to some  
methods used in the view so that prompts you to start writing examples  
on the model level.  Isolation has it's benefits, however an  
integration test (i.e. Cucumber scenario) is really needed to make  
sure these parts are all working together as expected.

>
>
> I read that I'm "encouraged" to do these in isolation, but IMHO the
> chapter on spec'ing views is not very convincing in its own right, it
> tells me that it's good, but doesn't show me as much, compared to the
> examples and descriptions of circumstance that make several other
> chapters very convincing.

FWIW Jesse, you are not alone on this list in thinking that view specs  
are not that valuable.  A lot of people share your opinion, and I  
think Cucumber is generally used to specify the views the majority of  
the time.  This enables you to specify your controllers in isolation  
since your Cucumber features are cutting through the entire stack.  I  
personally think  view specs are a very nice tool to have available,  
but I would only use them on complex views.  By complex I don't mean  
riddled with logic, but a view that has a lot of stuff going on which  
is hard to set up all in one integration test (or Cucumber scenario).   
Since the majority of views are very simple then verifying them just  
in Cucumber is good enough, IMO.

-Ben


From magic6435 at gmail.com  Sun Jun 28 06:41:23 2009
From: magic6435 at gmail.com (Michael)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 03:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing a Create action to make sure the User is
	assigned to a new Model
Message-ID: <6cbd49ce-57dd-40c9-8fc5-588d1f9333d0@a7g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>

I'm trying to figure out how to test that the current_user does end up
being attached to a new model that is being created which happens to
be an Album.

Here is the Controller code.

  def create
    @album = current_user.albums.new params[:album]
    if @album.save
      flash[:notice] = "The album was saved successfully."
      redirect_to @album
    else
      render :action => :new
    end
  end

and here is a quick overview of how i have been testing so far.

  before(:each) do
    @album = mock_model(Album, :save => nil)
    Album.stub(:new).and_return(@album)
  end

  describe "authenticated user" do

    before(:each) do
      activate_authlogic
      UserSession.create Factory.build(:valid_user)
    end

    it "should build new album" do
      Album.should_receive(:new).with("title" => "album title",
"description" => "album description").and_return(@album)
      post :create, :album => {"title" => "album title", "description"
=> "album description"}
    end

    it "should save the album" do
      @album.should_receive(:save)
      post :create
    end

end

How would i test to make sure that on the save "user_id" is present
and matches the logged in user?

Thanks for any help.

-mike




From magic6435 at gmail.com  Sun Jun 28 06:33:06 2009
From: magic6435 at gmail.com (Michael)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 03:33:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing a Create action to make sure the User is
	assigned to a new Model
Message-ID: <ac8d0c9b-aa13-4636-8e23-6eb232c5d416@3g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>

I'm trying to figure out how to test that the current_user does end up
being attached to a new model that is being created which happens to
be an Album.

Here is the Controller code.

  def create
    @album = current_user.albums.new params[:album]
    if @album.save
      flash[:notice] = "The album was saved successfully."
      redirect_to @album
    else
      render :action => :new
    end
  end

and here is a quick overview of how i have been testing so far.

  before(:each) do
    @album = mock_model(Album, :save => nil)
    Album.stub(:new).and_return(@album)
  end

  describe "authenticated user" do

    before(:each) do
      activate_authlogic
      UserSession.create Factory.build(:valid_user)
    end

    it "should build new album" do
      Album.should_receive(:new).with("title" => "album title",
"description" => "album description").and_return(@album)
      post :create, :album => {"title" => "album title", "description"
=> "album description"}
    end

    it "should save the album" do
      @album.should_receive(:save)
      post :create
    end

end

How would i test to make sure that on the save "user_id" is present
and matches the logged in user?

Thanks for any help.

-mike




From sarah at ultrasaurus.com  Sun Jun 28 14:56:18 2009
From: sarah at ultrasaurus.com (Sarah Allen)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 11:56:18 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Integrate or isolate views?
In-Reply-To: <03369D62-AD08-4922-8D43-8289506E9AAC@benmabey.com>
References: <c97aaf3f7eda7ffd41d2f28fac172bbd@ruby-forum.com>
	<03369D62-AD08-4922-8D43-8289506E9AAC@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <2F96CC14-B30F-48A4-9899-E75E14DB114C@ultrasaurus.com>

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.  The  
controller specs establish the post-condition for the controller  
independent of the view.  In the project I'm working on (which has  
mobile clients as well as a website), we have end-to-end integrations  
tests using cucumber that are primarily around our XML APIs (which are  
from my perspective, just a different kind of view) -- these also  
serve as developer docs.

My $.02

Sarah

On Jun 28, 2009, at 10:27 AM, Ben Mabey wrote:

>
> On Jun 28, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Jesse Crockett wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've been trying for two years to pick up BDD.  I'm making progress,
>> have just read through the chapters in The RSpec Book on spec'ing  
>> views
>> and controllers.
>>
>> What is the difference between using integrate_views and doing what
>> seems to be a lot of extra work to test the views in isolation?
>>
>> When I use integrate_views, can I write view spec in what would
>> otherwise be isolated controller spec?
>
> Correct, by default RSpec's controller specs will not render the  
> view.  This allows you to test the controller and view in complete  
> isolation.  By turning on integrate_views you can specify what the  
> rendered view should contain at the same time.  If you were to do  
> outside-in dev starting from the view you would start out by writing  
> an isolated view spec.  That spec would say that such and such would  
> be displayed.  This would in turn prompt you to assign something to  
> that view for it to be rendered.  That is then your signal that the  
> controller needs to assign that object.  So, you go up a level and  
> make sure that the controller action is assigning the needed object  
> for the view.  That object will most likely have to answer to some  
> methods used in the view so that prompts you to start writing  
> examples on the model level.  Isolation has it's benefits, however  
> an integration test (i.e. Cucumber scenario) is really needed to  
> make sure these parts are all working together as expected.
>
>>
>>
>> I read that I'm "encouraged" to do these in isolation, but IMHO the
>> chapter on spec'ing views is not very convincing in its own right, it
>> tells me that it's good, but doesn't show me as much, compared to the
>> examples and descriptions of circumstance that make several other
>> chapters very convincing.
>
> FWIW Jesse, you are not alone on this list in thinking that view  
> specs are not that valuable.  A lot of people share your opinion,  
> and I think Cucumber is generally used to specify the views the  
> majority of the time.  This enables you to specify your controllers  
> in isolation since your Cucumber features are cutting through the  
> entire stack.  I personally think  view specs are a very nice tool  
> to have available, but I would only use them on complex views.  By  
> complex I don't mean riddled with logic, but a view that has a lot  
> of stuff going on which is hard to set up all in one integration  
> test (or Cucumber scenario).  Since the majority of views are very  
> simple then verifying them just in Cucumber is good enough, IMO.
>
> -Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

http://www.ultrasaurus.com




From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sun Jun 28 15:13:23 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Jesse Crockett)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 21:13:23 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Integrate or isolate views?
In-Reply-To: <03369D62-AD08-4922-8D43-8289506E9AAC@benmabey.com>
References: <c97aaf3f7eda7ffd41d2f28fac172bbd@ruby-forum.com>
	<03369D62-AD08-4922-8D43-8289506E9AAC@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <6343e04079b65aeea9bdb4ac8724e626@ruby-forum.com>

Ben Mabey wrote:
> On Jun 28, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Jesse Crockett wrote:
> 
>> When I use integrate_views, can I write view spec in what would
>> otherwise be isolated controller spec?
> 
> Correct, by default RSpec's controller specs will not render the
> view.  This allows you to test the controller and view in complete
> isolation.  By turning on integrate_views you can specify what the
> rendered view should contain at the same time.  If you were to do
> outside-in dev starting from the view you would start out by writing
> an isolated view spec.  That spec would say that such and such would
> be displayed.  This would in turn prompt you to assign something to
> that view for it to be rendered.  That is then your signal that the
> controller needs to assign that object.  So, you go up a level and
> make sure that the controller action is assigning the needed object
> for the view.  That object will most likely have to answer to some
> methods used in the view so that prompts you to start writing examples
> on the model level.  Isolation has it's benefits, however an
> integration test (i.e. Cucumber scenario) is really needed to make
> sure these parts are all working together as expected.
> 
>>
>>
>> I read that I'm "encouraged" to do these in isolation, but IMHO the
>> chapter on spec'ing views is not very convincing in its own right, it
>> tells me that it's good, but doesn't show me as much, compared to the
>> examples and descriptions of circumstance that make several other
>> chapters very convincing.
> 
> FWIW Jesse, you are not alone on this list in thinking that view specs
> are not that valuable.  A lot of people share your opinion, and I
> think Cucumber is generally used to specify the views the majority of
> the time.  This enables you to specify your controllers in isolation
> since your Cucumber features are cutting through the entire stack. 

I gather that you are saying a balance of cucumber scenarios in tandem 
with spec'ing controllers and models in isolation is a reasonable 
conclusion and equally reasonable path to move forward?

> I personally think  view specs are a very nice tool to have available,
> but I would only use them on complex views.  By complex I don't mean
> riddled with logic, but a view that has a lot of stuff going on which
> is hard to set up all in one integration test (or Cucumber scenario).
> Since the majority of views are very simple then verifying them just
> in Cucumber is good enough, IMO.
> 
> -Ben


I gather that you are affirming that adequate testing of controllers and 
models in isolation as presscribed the the Rspec Book can be 
accomplished without spec'ing the views in the same isolation, but 
instead by using 'integrate_views' with adequate cucumber scenarios?
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sun Jun 28 15:16:48 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Jesse Crockett)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 21:16:48 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Integrate or isolate views?
In-Reply-To: <2F96CC14-B30F-48A4-9899-E75E14DB114C@ultrasaurus.com>
References: <c97aaf3f7eda7ffd41d2f28fac172bbd@ruby-forum.com>
	<03369D62-AD08-4922-8D43-8289506E9AAC@benmabey.com>
	<2F96CC14-B30F-48A4-9899-E75E14DB114C@ultrasaurus.com>
Message-ID: <557cce2c2790af8aadbc90b257516df8@ruby-forum.com>

Sarah Allen 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.  The
> controller specs establish the post-condition for the controller
> independent of the view.  In the project I'm working on (which has
> mobile clients as well as a website), we have end-to-end integrations
> tests using cucumber that are primarily around our XML APIs (which are
> from my perspective, just a different kind of view) -- these also
> serve as developer docs.
> 
> My $.02
> 
> Sarah


IMO, this is what the RSpec Book needs (at this point in beta), 
real-world conclusions based on experience, rather than "take it on 
faith that you will 'revel' in the rewards."  Thanks, Sarah
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From ben at benmabey.com  Sun Jun 28 16:33:45 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 14:33:45 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Integrate or isolate views?
In-Reply-To: <6343e04079b65aeea9bdb4ac8724e626@ruby-forum.com>
References: <c97aaf3f7eda7ffd41d2f28fac172bbd@ruby-forum.com>	<03369D62-AD08-4922-8D43-8289506E9AAC@benmabey.com>
	<6343e04079b65aeea9bdb4ac8724e626@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <4A47D3A9.2000105@benmabey.com>

Jesse Crockett wrote:
> Ben Mabey wrote:
>   
>> On Jun 28, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Jesse Crockett wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> When I use integrate_views, can I write view spec in what would
>>> otherwise be isolated controller spec?
>>>       
>> Correct, by default RSpec's controller specs will not render the
>> view.  This allows you to test the controller and view in complete
>> isolation.  By turning on integrate_views you can specify what the
>> rendered view should contain at the same time.  If you were to do
>> outside-in dev starting from the view you would start out by writing
>> an isolated view spec.  That spec would say that such and such would
>> be displayed.  This would in turn prompt you to assign something to
>> that view for it to be rendered.  That is then your signal that the
>> controller needs to assign that object.  So, you go up a level and
>> make sure that the controller action is assigning the needed object
>> for the view.  That object will most likely have to answer to some
>> methods used in the view so that prompts you to start writing examples
>> on the model level.  Isolation has it's benefits, however an
>> integration test (i.e. Cucumber scenario) is really needed to make
>> sure these parts are all working together as expected.
>>
>>     
>>> I read that I'm "encouraged" to do these in isolation, but IMHO the
>>> chapter on spec'ing views is not very convincing in its own right, it
>>> tells me that it's good, but doesn't show me as much, compared to the
>>> examples and descriptions of circumstance that make several other
>>> chapters very convincing.
>>>       
>> FWIW Jesse, you are not alone on this list in thinking that view specs
>> are not that valuable.  A lot of people share your opinion, and I
>> think Cucumber is generally used to specify the views the majority of
>> the time.  This enables you to specify your controllers in isolation
>> since your Cucumber features are cutting through the entire stack. 
>>     
>
> I gather that you are saying a balance of cucumber scenarios in tandem 
> with spec'ing controllers and models in isolation is a reasonable 
> conclusion and equally reasonable path to move forward?
>   

Yes, IME this has worked well.
>   
>> I personally think  view specs are a very nice tool to have available,
>> but I would only use them on complex views.  By complex I don't mean
>> riddled with logic, but a view that has a lot of stuff going on which
>> is hard to set up all in one integration test (or Cucumber scenario).
>> Since the majority of views are very simple then verifying them just
>> in Cucumber is good enough, IMO.
>>
>> -Ben
>>     
>
>
> I gather that you are affirming that adequate testing of controllers and 
> models in isolation as presscribed the the Rspec Book can be 
> accomplished without spec'ing the views in the same isolation, but 
> instead by using 'integrate_views' with adequate cucumber scenarios?
>   

The last part of your sentence is confusing me: "but instead by using 
'integrate_views' with adequate cucumber scenarios?".  There is no 
"integrate_views" option in Cucumber as views are always rendered.  When 
I am using Cucumber I don't see the need to be using 'integrate_views' 
in my controller specs either. 

Keep in mind that I'm not affirming anything as a hard rule, but rather 
stating a guideline that I have gravitated towards in my past projects 
that were webapps.  You, like Sarah, may see enough value provided by 
view specs to warrant them.  I would encourage you to try them and then 
judge for yourself and the specific project you are working on.  If you 
don't get any value out of them then you can stop but you will at least 
know how to do it when a situation arises that seems better fit for them.

HTH,
Ben

From orengolan at gmail.com  Sun Jun 28 16:58:39 2009
From: orengolan at gmail.com (oren)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:58:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing with activerecord at ThoughtWorks
	(Stubbing vs real DB)
In-Reply-To: <4A470EF2.8070006@benmabey.com>
References: <6b3d89e1-ce80-4e7d-b14b-2596d628f42d@b14g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>
	<4A470EF2.8070006@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <78c84226-c31e-4c72-8bb3-c0e6770e0f97@t21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>

Awesome presentation, thanks for clarifying it Ben.

From matt at mattwynne.net  Sun Jun 28 17:04:39 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:04:39 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Test doubles: expect "x" and don't care about
	anything else
In-Reply-To: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>
References: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>
Message-ID: <2CFD89CC-79AF-4F9E-9B56-C8C4EE7B90E5@mattwynne.net>


On 28 Jun 2009, at 13:07, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:

> I've had one of my recurring doubts about test doubles come up again.
>
> The full post is here but I'll abbreviate the content in this  
> message in any case:
>
>  https://wincent.com/blog/thinking-about-switching-to-rr
>
> Basically, in one of my controller specs I wanted to verify that the  
> following line was being called and doing the right thing:
>  @comment = Comment.find params[:id]
> I had a mock for this set up, but it broke when unrelated code in  
> the model was modified (a complex callback which itself called  
> Comment.find).

I'd like to know more about how this happened. How did the model  
object's behaviour leak into the controller spec?

> The problems were as follows:
>
>  - A mock was more than I really needed, as I didn't want to go  
> through the complication of returning a substitute object.
>
>  - The expectation set on the mock was too strict, because the other  
> message send to Comment.find, the one I didn't care about, was  
> triggering a failure.
>
>  - A proxy would suffice, because all I really wanted to confirm was  
> that the "find" message was sent, without actually interfering with  
> the returned object.
>
>  - I basically wanted to set an expectation "that this class will  
> receive this message with these params", but the frameworks didn't  
> allow me to do that because in reality you can only assert "that  
> this class will receive this message with these params _and not  
> receive that message with any other params at any time_"
>
> In my blog post I detailed the possible options for avoiding the  
> problem, and the easiest ended up being: forget mocks and proxies  
> entirely and instead test the side-effect (that the expected object  
> ends up getting assigned to the "@comment" instance variable).
>
> So the workaround worked, but RSpec's own mock framework, and from  
> what I can tell, the alternatives such as Mocha, RR et al, wouldn't  
> really let me make the kind of assertion that I wanted to make: ie.  
> "confirm this message gets sent at some point, but don't modify the  
> behaviour at all, and don't interfere with or worry about any other  
> messages that get sent to the object, including messages sent to the  
> method that I'm setting the expectation on".
>
> In my ideal test-double framework, I'd like to really assert two  
> things about the line of code in question:
>
>  1. That Comment.find gets called with a specific param at some  
> point in time.
>  2. That the @comment instance variable gets the expected value  
> assigned to it.

So why not use

Comment.stub!(:find).with(123).and_return(mock(Comment))

> I literally don't care about what other messages get sent to  
> Comment, nor about other places in the code where Comment.find might  
> get called with other parameters, and in any case I don't want to  
> actually modify the behaviour or substitute my own return values.  
> But it seems I can't do this with existing test double frameworks,  
> and it makes it hard to write minimal specs with one expectation and  
> as few test doubles as possible (ideally zero or one) per "it" block.
>
> Ideally I'd want to write something like:
>
>  it 'should find the comment' do
>    proxy(Comment).find(@comment.id.to_s)
>    do_put
>  end
>
>  it 'should assign to the @comment instance variable' do
>    assigns[:comment].should == @comment
>    do_put
>  end
>
> Note that with the "proxy" syntax above I'm trying to say:
>
>  - I expect this message and these params to be sent at some point
>
>  - I don't care if other messages are sent
>
>  - I don't even care if the "find" method is also called with  
> different params
>
>  - I don't care about the order of the messages
>
>  - I don't want to interfere with or substitute the return value
>
> I don't know whether the syntax is adequate, or whether some keyword  
> other than "proxy" would be required. Another alternative I thought  
> of was:
>
>  it 'should find the comment' do
>    spy(Comment)
>    do_put
>    Comment.should have_received.find(@comment.id.to_s)
>  end
>
> Or similar... Basically saying that I want the double framework to  
> spy (proxy _and_ record) all messages to the specified receiver, and  
> that afterwards I'm going to retrospectively check that among the  
> recorded messages is the one I'm looking for.
>
> What do other people think?
>
>  - is what I'm wanting to do a reasonable approach?
>
>  - are there any test double frameworks out there which would allow  
> me to work in this way?
>
> Cheers,
> Wincent

cheers,
Matt Wynne

http://mattwynne.net
+447974 430184


From matt at mattwynne.net  Sun Jun 28 17:11:17 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:11:17 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing a Create action to make sure the User is
	assigned to a new Model
In-Reply-To: <ac8d0c9b-aa13-4636-8e23-6eb232c5d416@3g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
References: <ac8d0c9b-aa13-4636-8e23-6eb232c5d416@3g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <92E21B72-A3ED-4F74-989B-3F7D5B405D0B@mattwynne.net>


On 28 Jun 2009, at 11:33, Michael wrote:

> I'm trying to figure out how to test that the current_user does end up
> being attached to a new model that is being created which happens to
> be an Album.
>
> Here is the Controller code.
>
>  def create
>    @album = current_user.albums.new params[:album]
>    if @album.save
>      flash[:notice] = "The album was saved successfully."
>      redirect_to @album
>    else
>      render :action => :new
>    end
>  end
>
> and here is a quick overview of how i have been testing so far.
>
>  before(:each) do
>    @album = mock_model(Album, :save => nil)
>    Album.stub(:new).and_return(@album)
>  end
>
>  describe "authenticated user" do
>
>    before(:each) do
>      activate_authlogic
>      UserSession.create Factory.build(:valid_user)
>    end
>
>    it "should build new album" do
>      Album.should_receive(:new).with("title" => "album title",
> "description" => "album description").and_return(@album)
>      post :create, :album => {"title" => "album title", "description"
> => "album description"}
>    end
>
>    it "should save the album" do
>      @album.should_receive(:save)
>      post :create
>    end
>
> end
>
> How would i test to make sure that on the save "user_id" is present
> and matches the logged in user?

 From the code you've shown us, it looks as though you need to spec  
the view, since I presume that's where the params[:album] which may or  
may not contain this user_id is built. The controller is just passing  
these params directly to the model's constructor, so it doesn't really  
seem to have much of a part to play as regards this specific field.

This might be a case where you'll get more value from a full-stack  
Cucumber acceptance test.

cheers,
Matt Wynne

http://mattwynne.net
+447974 430184


From win at wincent.com  Sun Jun 28 18:02:51 2009
From: win at wincent.com (Wincent Colaiuta)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:02:51 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Test doubles: expect "x" and don't care about
	anything else
In-Reply-To: <2CFD89CC-79AF-4F9E-9B56-C8C4EE7B90E5@mattwynne.net>
References: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>
	<2CFD89CC-79AF-4F9E-9B56-C8C4EE7B90E5@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <7CF4F3D7-4CCE-42AC-BC2D-58C4442ECCE6@wincent.com>

El 28/6/2009, a las 23:04, Matt Wynne escribi?:

> On 28 Jun 2009, at 13:07, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>
>> I've had one of my recurring doubts about test doubles come up again.
>>
>> The full post is here but I'll abbreviate the content in this  
>> message in any case:
>>
>> https://wincent.com/blog/thinking-about-switching-to-rr
>>
>> Basically, in one of my controller specs I wanted to verify that  
>> the following line was being called and doing the right thing:
>> @comment = Comment.find params[:id]
>> I had a mock for this set up, but it broke when unrelated code in  
>> the model was modified (a complex callback which itself called  
>> Comment.find).
>
> I'd like to know more about how this happened. How did the model  
> object's behaviour leak into the controller spec?

This was a spec for the controller's "update" action, which does a  
"save" on the record. At one point a change was made to the model to  
do some complex updates in the after_save callback, and these involved  
doing another Comment.find call, but with different parameters.

>> In my ideal test-double framework, I'd like to really assert two  
>> things about the line of code in question:
>>
>> 1. That Comment.find gets called with a specific param at some  
>> point in time.
>> 2. That the @comment instance variable gets the expected value  
>> assigned to it.
>
> So why not use
>
> Comment.stub!(:find).with(123).and_return(mock(Comment))

Because there are actually two "find" calls here:

- the one I actually care about
- the other one in the after_save callback which is irrelevant to the  
controller

I original used "should_receive", not "stub", so RSpec complained  
about getting "find" with the unexpected parameters. If I change to  
"stub" then I'm losing my assertion (no longer checking that the  
message gets sent), injecting a different return value (adding  
complexity), for no visible benefit (may as well just throw away the  
expectation).

Cheers,
Wincent




From matt at mattwynne.net  Mon Jun 29 03:33:48 2009
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:33:48 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Test doubles: expect "x" and don't care about
	anything else
In-Reply-To: <7CF4F3D7-4CCE-42AC-BC2D-58C4442ECCE6@wincent.com>
References: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>
	<2CFD89CC-79AF-4F9E-9B56-C8C4EE7B90E5@mattwynne.net>
	<7CF4F3D7-4CCE-42AC-BC2D-58C4442ECCE6@wincent.com>
Message-ID: <0740D1A8-44AB-43A5-8E7C-0FD27BB6E3F2@mattwynne.net>


On 28 Jun 2009, at 23:02, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:

> El 28/6/2009, a las 23:04, Matt Wynne escribi?:
>
>> On 28 Jun 2009, at 13:07, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>>
>>> I've had one of my recurring doubts about test doubles come up  
>>> again.
>>>
>>> The full post is here but I'll abbreviate the content in this  
>>> message in any case:
>>>
>>> https://wincent.com/blog/thinking-about-switching-to-rr
>>>
>>> Basically, in one of my controller specs I wanted to verify that  
>>> the following line was being called and doing the right thing:
>>> @comment = Comment.find params[:id]
>>> I had a mock for this set up, but it broke when unrelated code in  
>>> the model was modified (a complex callback which itself called  
>>> Comment.find).
>>
>> I'd like to know more about how this happened. How did the model  
>> object's behaviour leak into the controller spec?
>
> This was a spec for the controller's "update" action, which does a  
> "save" on the record. At one point a change was made to the model to  
> do some complex updates in the after_save callback, and these  
> involved doing another Comment.find call, but with different  
> parameters.

If I understand this correctly, there was only one call from  
Controller -> Comment that you wanted to test; the other one was a  
call from Comment -> Comment that happened as a side-effect.

So I'm wondering: if you'd returned a fake (mock, stub, whatever)  
comment from your stubbed Comment.find, would that have solved the  
problem?

>
>
>>> In my ideal test-double framework, I'd like to really assert two  
>>> things about the line of code in question:
>>>
>>> 1. That Comment.find gets called with a specific param at some  
>>> point in time.
>>> 2. That the @comment instance variable gets the expected value  
>>> assigned to it.
>>
>> So why not use
>>
>> Comment.stub!(:find).with(123).and_return(mock(Comment))
>
> Because there are actually two "find" calls here:
>
> - the one I actually care about
> - the other one in the after_save callback which is irrelevant to  
> the controller
>
> I original used "should_receive", not "stub", so RSpec complained  
> about getting "find" with the unexpected parameters. If I change to  
> "stub" then I'm losing my assertion (no longer checking that the  
> message gets sent), injecting a different return value (adding  
> complexity), for no visible benefit (may as well just throw away the  
> expectation).

What I often do is put a stub in first, which will work in all the  
examples, then put a should_receive in one of the examples if (as  
seems to be the case here) it's important to me to test the  
collaboration between the objects. So it would look like this:

describe "#update" do
   before(:each)
     @comment = mock(Comment)
     Comment.stub!(:find).and_return(@comment)
   end

   it "should call the model to try and find the comment"
     Comment.should_receive(:find).with(123).and_return(@comment)
     do_request
   end

   it "should assign the comment to the view"
     do_request
     assigns[:comment].should == @comment
   end

So the stub works in the background, then when you want to actually  
assert for the collaboration, you can override it with a  
should_receive. I find this pattern works really well for me.

cheers,
Matt Wynne

http://mattwynne.net
+447974 430184


From win at wincent.com  Mon Jun 29 04:57:06 2009
From: win at wincent.com (Wincent Colaiuta)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 10:57:06 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Test doubles: expect "x" and don't care about
	anything else
In-Reply-To: <0740D1A8-44AB-43A5-8E7C-0FD27BB6E3F2@mattwynne.net>
References: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>
	<2CFD89CC-79AF-4F9E-9B56-C8C4EE7B90E5@mattwynne.net>
	<7CF4F3D7-4CCE-42AC-BC2D-58C4442ECCE6@wincent.com>
	<0740D1A8-44AB-43A5-8E7C-0FD27BB6E3F2@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <146B01EB-3718-4136-B463-37793B1E1EED@wincent.com>

El 29/6/2009, a las 9:33, Matt Wynne escribi?:

> On 28 Jun 2009, at 23:02, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>
>> El 28/6/2009, a las 23:04, Matt Wynne escribi?:
>>
>>> On 28 Jun 2009, at 13:07, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've had one of my recurring doubts about test doubles come up  
>>>> again.
>>>>
>>>> The full post is here but I'll abbreviate the content in this  
>>>> message in any case:
>>>>
>>>> https://wincent.com/blog/thinking-about-switching-to-rr
>>>>
>>>> Basically, in one of my controller specs I wanted to verify that  
>>>> the following line was being called and doing the right thing:
>>>> @comment = Comment.find params[:id]
>>>> I had a mock for this set up, but it broke when unrelated code in  
>>>> the model was modified (a complex callback which itself called  
>>>> Comment.find).
>>>
>>> I'd like to know more about how this happened. How did the model  
>>> object's behaviour leak into the controller spec?
>>
>> This was a spec for the controller's "update" action, which does a  
>> "save" on the record. At one point a change was made to the model  
>> to do some complex updates in the after_save callback, and these  
>> involved doing another Comment.find call, but with different  
>> parameters.
>
> If I understand this correctly, there was only one call from  
> Controller -> Comment that you wanted to test; the other one was a  
> call from Comment -> Comment that happened as a side-effect.

Exactly.

> So I'm wondering: if you'd returned a fake (mock, stub, whatever)  
> comment from your stubbed Comment.find, would that have solved the  
> problem?

Yes, but there's something about that that felt somehow harder than it  
should be.

I mean, I had a working, dead-simple controller spec. I made an  
unrelated change in the model, and the controller spec broke.  
Returning a fake would certainly fix the breakage, but the spec would  
no longer be dead-simple and it somehow feels like one step foward,  
two steps back, that due to innocuous model changes I have to increase  
the complexity of my controller tests.

So what I'm really pining for is the ability to say "expect this  
message, but don't return fakes -- just proxy the message through and  
return the real return value -- and don't worry about any other  
messages".

Cheers,
Wincent



From ben at benmabey.com  Mon Jun 29 10:26:10 2009
From: ben at benmabey.com (Ben Mabey)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:26:10 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Test doubles: expect "x" and don't care
 about	anything else
In-Reply-To: <0740D1A8-44AB-43A5-8E7C-0FD27BB6E3F2@mattwynne.net>
References: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>	<2CFD89CC-79AF-4F9E-9B56-C8C4EE7B90E5@mattwynne.net>	<7CF4F3D7-4CCE-42AC-BC2D-58C4442ECCE6@wincent.com>
	<0740D1A8-44AB-43A5-8E7C-0FD27BB6E3F2@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <4A48CF02.7070200@benmabey.com>

Matt Wynne wrote:
>
> On 28 Jun 2009, at 23:02, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>
>> El 28/6/2009, a las 23:04, Matt Wynne escribi?:
>>
>>> On 28 Jun 2009, at 13:07, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've had one of my recurring doubts about test doubles come up again.
>>>>
>>>> The full post is here but I'll abbreviate the content in this 
>>>> message in any case:
>>>>
>>>> https://wincent.com/blog/thinking-about-switching-to-rr
>>>>
>>>> Basically, in one of my controller specs I wanted to verify that 
>>>> the following line was being called and doing the right thing:
>>>> @comment = Comment.find params[:id]
>>>> I had a mock for this set up, but it broke when unrelated code in 
>>>> the model was modified (a complex callback which itself called 
>>>> Comment.find).
>>>
>>> I'd like to know more about how this happened. How did the model 
>>> object's behaviour leak into the controller spec?
>>
>> This was a spec for the controller's "update" action, which does a 
>> "save" on the record. At one point a change was made to the model to 
>> do some complex updates in the after_save callback, and these 
>> involved doing another Comment.find call, but with different parameters.
>
> If I understand this correctly, there was only one call from 
> Controller -> Comment that you wanted to test; the other one was a 
> call from Comment -> Comment that happened as a side-effect.
>
> So I'm wondering: if you'd returned a fake (mock, stub, whatever) 
> comment from your stubbed Comment.find, would that have solved the 
> problem?
>
>>
>>
>>>> In my ideal test-double framework, I'd like to really assert two 
>>>> things about the line of code in question:
>>>>
>>>> 1. That Comment.find gets called with a specific param at some 
>>>> point in time.
>>>> 2. That the @comment instance variable gets the expected value 
>>>> assigned to it.
>>>
>>> So why not use
>>>
>>> Comment.stub!(:find).with(123).and_return(mock(Comment))
>>
>> Because there are actually two "find" calls here:
>>
>> - the one I actually care about
>> - the other one in the after_save callback which is irrelevant to the 
>> controller
>>
>> I original used "should_receive", not "stub", so RSpec complained 
>> about getting "find" with the unexpected parameters. If I change to 
>> "stub" then I'm losing my assertion (no longer checking that the 
>> message gets sent), injecting a different return value (adding 
>> complexity), for no visible benefit (may as well just throw away the 
>> expectation).
>
> What I often do is put a stub in first, which will work in all the 
> examples, then put a should_receive in one of the examples if (as 
> seems to be the case here) it's important to me to test the 
> collaboration between the objects. So it would look like this:
>
> describe "#update" do
>   before(:each)
>     @comment = mock(Comment)
>     Comment.stub!(:find).and_return(@comment)
>   end
>
>   it "should call the model to try and find the comment"
>     Comment.should_receive(:find).with(123).and_return(@comment)
>     do_request
>   end

You probably know this, but for the benefit of others... Pat made a 
change a while back that makes it so the stubbed return value will still 
be returned even if an expectation is added.  Meaning, assuming the stub 
is in the before block, you can change the expectation to:
    Comment.should_receive(:find).with(123)  # this will still return 
@comment

-Ben


From win at wincent.com  Mon Jun 29 11:15:37 2009
From: win at wincent.com (Wincent Colaiuta)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:15:37 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Test doubles: expect "x" and don't care
	about	anything else
In-Reply-To: <4A48CF02.7070200@benmabey.com>
References: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>	<2CFD89CC-79AF-4F9E-9B56-C8C4EE7B90E5@mattwynne.net>	<7CF4F3D7-4CCE-42AC-BC2D-58C4442ECCE6@wincent.com>
	<0740D1A8-44AB-43A5-8E7C-0FD27BB6E3F2@mattwynne.net>
	<4A48CF02.7070200@benmabey.com>
Message-ID: <5086D76C-D50F-4530-AC4F-4B44FD5F4E2B@wincent.com>

El 29/6/2009, a las 16:26, Ben Mabey escribi?:

> You probably know this, but for the benefit of others... Pat made a  
> change a while back that makes it so the stubbed return value will  
> still be returned even if an expectation is added.  Meaning,  
> assuming the stub is in the before block, you can change the  
> expectation to:
>   Comment.should_receive(:find).with(123)  # this will still return  
> @comment

I didn't know that, but it's pretty awesome. Basically means that  
RSpec mocks can double as proxies now. That's pretty neat.

Cheers,
Wincent




From win at wincent.com  Mon Jun 29 11:24:39 2009
From: win at wincent.com (Wincent Colaiuta)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:24:39 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Test doubles: expect "x" and don't care
	about	anything else
In-Reply-To: <5086D76C-D50F-4530-AC4F-4B44FD5F4E2B@wincent.com>
References: <8CCEC67D-0EFD-418C-95F5-E55DA95209FA@wincent.com>	<2CFD89CC-79AF-4F9E-9B56-C8C4EE7B90E5@mattwynne.net>	<7CF4F3D7-4CCE-42AC-BC2D-58C4442ECCE6@wincent.com>
	<0740D1A8-44AB-43A5-8E7C-0FD27BB6E3F2@mattwynne.net>
	<4A48CF02.7070200@benmabey.com>
	<5086D76C-D50F-4530-AC4F-4B44FD5F4E2B@wincent.com>
Message-ID: <AFB90630-5BCE-4422-9322-F913F20AAECB@wincent.com>

El 29/6/2009, a las 17:15, Wincent Colaiuta escribi?:

> El 29/6/2009, a las 16:26, Ben Mabey escribi?:
>
>> You probably know this, but for the benefit of others... Pat made a  
>> change a while back that makes it so the stubbed return value will  
>> still be returned even if an expectation is added.  Meaning,  
>> assuming the stub is in the before block, you can change the  
>> expectation to:
>>  Comment.should_receive(:find).with(123)  # this will still return  
>> @comment
>
> I didn't know that, but it's pretty awesome. Basically means that  
> RSpec mocks can double as proxies now. That's pretty neat.

Er, I stand corrected. I went back looking for the change and found it  
(commit 72facc08), and then I re-read your description. Forget what I  
said about proxying.

Cheers,
Wincent



From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Jun 30 08:11:41 2009
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Ninad Pol)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 14:11:41 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem while generating rspec model in Rails
	Project
In-Reply-To: <57c63afe0906150618o7feb45e1pa359303de19dcf6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b6d18e516aac6bebcaa83dbf3222173@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906120713s668371a5ta0fde3035282b4aa@mail.gmail.com>
	<ab1869f9ed4453b53e99aa8fc1a5af6e@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906150534j6f7341a4n7436ff426fdc2687@mail.gmail.com>
	<9899a026050777dbe6b12120a7abbddd@ruby-forum.com>
	<57c63afe0906150618o7feb45e1pa359303de19dcf6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <823764c95661937020a0850f5e8cc61f@ruby-forum.com>

David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 8:04 AM, Ninad Pol<lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>> I think this problem is not related any plugin (that define a client)
>> simply because if i try it with any other ruby file(other than
>> Client.rb) also i am facing same problem.
> 
> So if you do this:
> 
> rails widgets
> cd widgets
> script\generate model widget
> script\generate rspec
> script\generate rspec_model widget
> 
> The last command tells you that Widget is already defined?
> 
>> And what do you mean by some extension in the lib directory?
> 
> I mean that you have a file in the lib directory in your Rails project
> that defines a client. I believe that loading the rails env (which
> happens when you run script\generate) loads the lib directory, so if
> you have a file in there that defines Client, then you'd run into this
> problem.

I am so sorry for not being replying for so long.I was busy working with 
some other things and kept aside RSPEC. Above command does not gave me 
any problem for "widgets" and model with name "widget" was created. But 
in my project i am still getting the same problem as mentioned earlier.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From zach.lists at gmail.com  Tue Jun 30 13:00:39 2009
From: zach.lists at gmail.com (Zach Moazeni)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2009 13:00:39 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Integrate or isolate views?
In-Reply-To: <557cce2c2790af8aadbc90b257516df8@ruby-forum.com>
References: <c97aaf3f7eda7ffd41d2f28fac172bbd@ruby-forum.com>
	<03369D62-AD08-4922-8D43-8289506E9AAC@benmabey.com>
	<2F96CC14-B30F-48A4-9899-E75E14DB114C@ultrasaurus.com>
	<557cce2c2790af8aadbc90b257516df8@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <AE01056F-4748-42B1-A978-F2B7FD5717BD@gmail.com>

Jesse,

I wrote a post that reflected on the pros/cons of testing views on a  
project of ours. http://simplechatter.com/2008/02/ascribe-a-case-study-on-view-specs/

I don't expect this to persuade anyone, but it was an attempt at an  
objective perspective.

On Jun 28, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Jesse Crockett wrote:

> IMO, this is what the RSpec Book needs (at this point in beta),
> real-world conclusions based on experience, rather than "take it on
> faith that you will 'revel' in the rewards."  Thanks, Sarah

--
Zach Moazeni
http://simplechatter.com