I'm working on a system that requires me to attach to an external
(readonly) database. In order to prevent Rails establishing a
connection to the external database for every test, I've written
something like this:
module External
class ExternalDBModel < ActiveRecord::Base
establish_co
I'm expecting my_test to raise one error or another, but since I'm
pulling data from a db, I don't know which error it will be. Is there a
better way to write this?
expect { my_test }.to raise_error { |error|
error.should satisfy {|e|
e.instance_of?(OneError) || e.instance_of?(OtherError)
One addendum: One thing I'd specifically like to know is where/how do
you test the *contents* of generated responses? That seems beyond the
purview of a controller test, but it doesn't require multiple
transactions or cross-controller interactions that would require an
integration test.
--
P
I'm trying to understand what belongs -- and what doesn't belong -- in
controller tests and in integration tests.
As a common example, assume I have a list of named widgets. Somewhere
in my code, I want to verify that
widget = FactoryGirl.create(:widget)
get :index
generates a page that
This is a rehash of a question I posed at:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9952317/isolating-controller-tests-from-models
The basic question: If I have a FoosController and a Foo model, can I
run FoosController rspec tests without creating the foos database table?
I haven't found a good way t
The basic question: how do you mock a reference to a polymorphic class
in RSpec? Trying the obvious thing leads to an error of the form:
undefined method `base_class' for Post:Class
=== The details:
# file: app/models/relation.rb
class Relation < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :entity, :pol
Justin Ko wrote in post #1040632:
> What are the failed expectations? Just paste it.
You've identified the problem (see below), but to answer your question:
1) Wizard electricity credentials with valid credentials should spawn
external loader
Failure/Error: @wizard.electricity_loader.shou
I have two blocks of tests: one for testing positive outcomes and one
for testing negative. After poking around, I've concluded that the
underlying :verify_credentials method is getting called, despite the
stub:
describe 'electricity credentials' do
before(:each) do
@wizard.electricit
My app has some logic that permits some actions before the user logs in,
and I depend upon session[:session_id] as a handle for some state.
My requests testing fails because session[:session_id] is null. I
attempted a somewhat brute force approach of putting this in my
specs/requests/authenticati
@Pat: thanks for the suggestions.
It's perhaps not only what David suggested -- I seem to be suffering
from some cached AR value. I changed my constant declaration to:
RESIDENTIAL = find_or_create_by_name("residential")
This keeps the number of instances down to a 1. That's good. But if I
SOLVED -- it was an AR caching problem. I had Factory code that was
essentially doing:
def make_me_a_premise(opts = {})
opts = MODEL_PREMISE_DEFAULTS.merge(opts)
premise = Factory(:premise)
Factory(:premise_group_member,
:premise => premise,
:premise_group =>
David Chelimsky wrote in post #983690:
>>RESIDENTIAL = self.create(:name => "residential")
> ^^ this is probably the problem ^^
> ...
Ah! got it. FWIW, I wrote a query to the Rails group several months
ago wondering if this construct was legit and got feedback that it was
legit. Your expl
yet more info...
The two errors appear to be closely related. When run as individual
files,
PremiseGroup#premises
is returning expected values. When run together, premise_group.premises
returns "phantom" premises (which show up as nil values). For test B,
the phantoms causes the count to b
David Chelimsky wrote in post #983675:
> On Feb 24, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Fearless Fool wrote:
> What are the failures you're seeing?
When running A before B, B's assertion that:
@common_options[:premise_group].premises.size.should == 3
fails because premise_group.premises.size =
A little additional information: every time I run the tests, it creates
a new PremiseGroup model. Shouldn't the db get rolled back between
tests?
Here is PremiseGroup, listed here in its entirety:
class PremiseGroup < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :premise_group_members, :dependent => :des
I'm baffled. If I do:
$ bundle exec ruby -S rspec --tty A_spec.rb
$ bundle exec ruby -S rspec --tty B_spec.rb
I get no errors. But then if I do:
$ bundle exec ruby -S rspec --tty A_spec.rb B_spec.rb
I get an error on B_spec. And if I reverse the order:
$ bundle exec ruby -S rspe
Scott Taylor wrote in post #981963:
> Is #unstub being called at any point?
> Scott
No, but I think I see what's happening: I'm stubbing a particular
(in-memory) instance of an AR. Later on in my code, the same AR is
fetched, but now has a different in-memory address, and thus isn't
subject to
Hmm - when I print puts(premise) rather than puts(premise.inspect), I
can see that they actually have different addresses, so they're not
really equal:
just stubbed #
entering lookup_stuff_on_the_web with #
Now my problem is figuring out why/where the other Premise is getting
created.
In
I'm looking at an example where a stub seems to work sometimes, and
sometimes appears to become "unstubbed". I haven't boiled it down to a
minimal example, but it goes something like this:
the model:
class Premise << ActiveRecord::Base
def lookup_stuff_on_the_web
$stderr.puts("entering
Mike Mazur wrote in post #981665:
> Perhaps one way to approach this is to have WebMock return an
> appropriate success message in response to the network call that
> :etl_attributes makes.
>
> Mike
Ah - good point. With all the options for stubbing and mocking, I'd
forgotten that one. Factory
I have a Premise model with an after_create method, along the lines of:
class Premise < ActiveRecord::Base
...
after_create :etl_attributes
...
end
In production code, etl_attributes accesses the web. For testing I'm
using WebMock and VCR in cases where I want to test the etl_attributes
fu
David Chelimsky wrote in post #981239:
> http://relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-rails/v/2-5/dir/mocks/mock-model
> HTH,
> David
Boy howdy, TH to the max. (How did I miss that???) Thanks.
- ff
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
___
rspec-users maili
I have a Premise model with lots of validations and somewhat complex
callbacks. I've already written tests for those (and they pass).
I also have a MeteredService model for which premise :has_many
metered_services and (of course) metered_service :belongs_to premise.
Testing MeteredService doesn'
Evgeniy Dolzhenko wrote in post #977322:
> You can pass a block to `have_selector` to nest your assertions, like:
> ...
> td is [#, ...] here
Most wonderfully cool. If it's Nokogiri, then I'm on familiar turf.
Thanks very much.
- ff
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
__
I'm hooked on RSpec after my first taste (thanks to
http://railstutorial.org/book/ruby-on-rails-tutorial). And of course I
have a newbish question.
Assume a contrived doc structure like:
moribund
Now lets say I want to write an RSpec controller test that will pass if
the status is
25 matches
Mail list logo
