[rspec-users] specs pass when run with other app specs, but fail when run independently
ben at benmabey.com
Tue Sep 2 01:49:57 EDT 2008
Tim Haines wrote:
> Hi David,
> You were spot on. The generated authenticated_system_spec included
> AuthenticatedSystem. If I include AuthenticatedSystem into the
> SessionsController spec, then the specs all pass. This is a problem
> with the standard specs that resful_authentication builds for you - so
> I'll looking at getting those fixed..
> I'm kind of curios that the specs are testing these protected methods
> - I would have expected that's generally not a done thing as they're
> not a public part of the API?
Yep, you're right. In general specing protected/private methods isn't
something you want to do. The only time I have a spec for such a method
is a result of a refactoring. Since the goal is to spec the behaviour
of an object it makes sense IMO to use black box testing and only spec
the public API as you pointed out. Whenever I find myself wanting to
spec non-public methods or to stub them I take that as a hint to extract
the methods out into other objects and then spec their public
interfaces. restful_auth does several things from a testing and design
point of view that aren't ideal though.
> I guess there's 3 options as to how to patch:
> 1) include AuthenticatedSystem, or
> 2) change the specs to use .send, or
> 3) remove the specs that are calling protected methods.
If you really want to spec the protected methods or want to keep the
existing specs around I would favor using the send method because it
keeps you "feeling dirty" everytime you do it.
Removing the specs that are calling the protected methods would be
better IMO but you could not simply remove them.. they would need to be
refactored to be specing the public API while still covering all of the
functionality provided in the protected methods. Again, the fact that
they have been specing the protected methods is an indication that
another object may want to be born to handle the extra responsibility...
Just my two cents.. HTH,
> Do you have any guidance on the best path forward here?
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 3:15 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com
> <mailto:dchelimsky at gmail.com>> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Tim Haines <tmhaines at gmail.com
> <mailto:tmhaines at gmail.com>> wrote:
> > Hi there,
> > I've noticed something a little odd with the session_controller
> specs that
> > are generated from the rails plugin restful_authentication.
> When they're
> > run with all the other app specs (i.e. when I first fire up
> autospec) the
> > specs all pass. However, if I touch the session_controller_spec
> file so
> > only the session_controller specs are run, some fail with the
> error message
> > protected method `logged_in?' called for
> > Can anyone explain why this might be or where I should start
> digging to try
> > and resolve this?
> logged_in? is protected in the module AuthenticatedSystem. Chances are
> that you've got a code example that's doing this:
> instead of this:
> and something that's not getting loaded when you run just
> sessions_controller_spec is including AuthenticatedSystem into the
> example group directly.
> > Cheers,
> > Tim.
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org <mailto:rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org <mailto:rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
More information about the rspec-users