[rspec-users] Strange mock_model behaviour with ActiveResource model
hughes.james at gmail.com
Wed Oct 17 15:48:55 EDT 2007
On 10/12/07, Bryan Ray <bryansray at gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you post your entire:
> it "should assign the found fa_codes for the view" block? as well as
> your fa_code controller? perhaps pastie it and link.
> That appears to be the spec failing.
It's actually all of the it blocks inside the "describe
FaCodesController, "handling GET /fa_codes" do" block -- and, if they
weren't commented out right now, all of these describe blocks all fail
in the same way:
describe FaCodesController, "handling GET /fa_codes.xml" do
describe FaCodesController, "handling GET /fa_codes/1" do
describe FaCodesController, "handling GET /fa_codes/1.xml" do
Here's the model, controller_spec and controller:
FYI, I tried changing the base class of the model to
ActiveRecord::Base and got the same error.
> James Hughes wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I have two models in an app that inherit from ActiveResource::Base.
> > The scaffold controller tests for one of the models works fine, but
> > the other one dies when calling mock_model in the "handling GET
> > /fa_codes" spec:
> > Specifically, the call to mock model here:
> > before do
> > @fa_code = mock_model(FaCode)
> > FaCode.stub!(:find).and_return([@fa_code])
> > end
> > generates this failure:
> > NameError in 'FaCodesController handling GET /fa_codes should assign
> > the found fa_codes for the view'
> > uninitialized constant Spec::Rails::Initializer
> > (eval):11:in `class'
> > /home/jhughes/dev/rj/gump_rewrite/vendor/plugins/rspec_on_rails/lib/spec/rails/dsl/behaviour/rails_example.rb:85:in
> > `add_stubs'
> > /home/jhughes/dev/rj/gump_rewrite/vendor/plugins/rspec_on_rails/lib/spec/rails/dsl/behaviour/rails_example.rb:73:in
> > `mock_model'
> > ./spec/controllers/fa_codes_controller_spec.rb:64:
> > This is with edge rails, trunk rspec and rspec_on_rails. I might have
> > pegged this as some Ares wierdness, but there are two models with the
> > same setup, and only one dies like this.
> > Any ideas?
> > James
More information about the rspec-users