[rspec-users] Change in isolation behaviour 1.08 - 1.10 ?
aslak hellesoy
aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com
Mon Dec 17 09:47:23 EST 2007
On Dec 17, 2007 2:13 PM, Jeroen Houben <jeroen.houben at lostboys.nl> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just moved from 1.08 to 1.10 and now have one example failing, which,
> under 1.08, passed. Is the due to a change in behaviour?
>
> Here's my spec (removed some passing examples)
>
> require File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper'
>
> describe "A user" do
>
> before(:each) do
> @user = User.new
> @valid_user = User.new(
> :email => 'bert.valid at lostboys.nl',
> :fname => 'bert',
> :lname => 'valid',
> :jobtitle => "programmer"
> )
> end
>
> it "should have a unique email address" do
> @valid_user.save.should == true
> @user.email = @valid_user.email
> @user.should have(1).error_on(:email)
> end
>
> it "should allow two users with the same name" do
> @valid_user.save.should == true
> @user.fname = @valid_user.fname
> @user.lname = @valid_user.lname
> @user.should have(:no).error_on(:fname)
> @user.should have(:no).error_on(:lname)
> end
>
> end
>
> The second example now fails, as the inserted record from the first example
> is not rolled back.
>
I don't see a fixtures :users in your spec. Do you have this in your
spec_helper?
Have you rerun script/generate rspec after you upgraded? There are
some changes in the spec_helper.rb file between the two releases.
Aslak
> I can just put a User.delete_all in an after(:each) block but I think it
> would be nicer if Rspec wrapped each example in a db transaction. Wasn't
> this they way things worked in 1.08 ?
>
> Jeroen
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
More information about the rspec-users
mailing list