[rspec-users] some fun functionality for all your specs
graeme.nelson at gmail.com
Sun Feb 18 10:27:02 EST 2007
Thanks for the clarification, Courtenay. I didn't realize that you
were testing to see if :order actually exists. I would still want to
know if someone removed the 'belongs_to :orders', so I might still
include Address.reflect_on_association :orders.
On Feb 17, 2007, at 9:52 PM, Courtenay wrote:
> On 2/17/07, Courtenay <court3nay at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2/17/07, Graeme Nelson <graeme.nelson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I am not sure what the have_valid_associations is really
>>> testing. If
>>> I have a model, like so:
>>> class Address < ActiveRecord::Base
>>> belongs_to :order
>> try this
>> class Address < ActiveRecord::Base
>> belongs_to :fooxl
>> make sure there's no Fooxl model.
>> the 'valid associations' there means that your association actually
>> would work, were you to call it. It's surprising how many
>> associations don't get tested at the model level.
> you could also try
> belongs_to :order, :foreign_key => 'monkey_id'
> and it'll fail the spec.
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
More information about the rspec-users