On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Pat Maddox <mailingli...@patmaddox.com> wrote: > I disagree with the crowd on the basis that these examples are lazy. Very > close to what I do though. > > Imagine you had one other example in there: > > it "should assign the post to the view" do > post :create > assigns[:post].should == @post > end > > Then you wouldn't really need the other should_receive examples. Why? Well, > there's no way for that object to be returned other than via your > User.find().build chain, is there?
Well actually you'd need a User.find().build chain which arranged for the stub @user to return @posts from a call to posts. <G> > I would still write the should_receive's, but they would include the > arguments I expect the method to receive. That's the point where something > could get screwed up. Right, you would want to prove that you were finding the right user in this case, although I'd guess in most conventional rails apps these days you'd actually stub the controllers current_user method to return @user rather than stubbing User.find -- 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@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
