[rspec-users] collection-based finder methods

amkirwan amkirwan at gmail.com
Wed Jul 22 11:54:34 EDT 2009


thanks, I understand now the ".and_return" part.

Here is the failure I am receiving

http://gist.github.com/152061

On Jul 22, 11:39 am, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:31 AM, amkirwan<amkir... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for the help but I guess I am not getting something. How is
> > @user= = mock_model(Person) and different then the following code:
>
> This is assigning the mock_model(Person) to a @user instance variable
> in the spec. This is not the same user that is in the controller.
>
> > message = mock_model(Message)
> > Message.stub!(:new).and_return message
> > message.should_receive(:save)
> > post :create
>
> This creates a mock_model(Message) and then tells Message to return it
> when it receives :new, therefore message in the spec is the same
> object as Message.new in the controller.
>
> > def create
> > message = Message.new params[:new]
> > message.save
> > end
> > I guess I don't understand why assigns[:letter] is expecting a Person
> > instance instead of a Letter instance
>
> I'm not clear on what you mean by this. Would you please post the full
> error message (either here or in a pastie or gist)?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 22, 10:42 am, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 9:12 AM, amkirwan<amkir... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > My spec is a messed up because I have tried everything I can think of
> >> > to mock but this is what I have for the show method. The @user
> >> > instance is setup in the login_and_before_filter_pass macros with the
> >> > following: @user = mock_model(Person, :null_object => true)
>
> >> > The error I keep receiving is that assigns[:letter].should equal
> >> > @letter keeps return that it is expecting a Person object instead of a
> >> > Letter object. The only way I can get it to pass is by putting
> >> > @user.letters.should_receive(:find).with("1").and_return(@letter)
> >> > directly in the "should assign the found letter for the view"
>
> >> > I feel like I must be missing something about how stubbing and mocking
> >> > work
>
> >> >  # Get /admin/letters/1
> >> >  def show
> >> >    id = params[:id]
> >> >    @letter =  @user.letters.find(id)
> >> >  end
>
> >> > describe Admin::LettersController, "SHOW GET /admin/letters/1" do
>
> >> >  before(:each) do
> >> >    @user.letters.should_receive(:find).with("1").and_return(@letter)
>
> >> This @user is an instance variable in the spec, and is not the same
> >> @user that is in the controller.
>
> >> HTH,
> >> David
>
> >> >  end
>
> >> >  def do_get
> >> >    put :show, {:id => "1"}, @session
> >> >  end
>
> >> >  login_and_before_filter_pass(:filter => :admin_only,
> >> >                             :request_method => :get,
> >> >                             :action => :show,
> >> >                             :parameters => {:cas_user => 'ak730'})
>
> >> >  it "should be successful" do
> >> >    do_get
> >> >    response.should be_success
> >> >  end
>
> >> >  it "should find the letter requested" do
> >> >    @user.letters.should_receive(:find).with("1").and_return(@letter)
> >> >    puts(@letter)
> >> >    do_get
> >> >  end
>
> >> >  it "should assign the found letter for the view" do
> >> >    # uncommenting will allow to pass
> >> >    # @user.letters.should_receive(:find).with("1").and_return
> >> > (@letter)
> >> >    do_get
> >> >    assigns[:letter].should equal(@letter)
> >> >  end
>
> >> >  it "should render show template" do
> >> >    do_get
> >> >    response.should render_template("show")
> >> >  end
>
> >> > end
>
> >> > On Jul 22, 9:13 am, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 11:21 PM, amkirwan<amkir... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > How do I spec this following example from the Agile Rails Book listed
> >> >> > below. I am doing a similar thing in my controller and when I
> >> >> > attempted to change it to the collection way of doing the find I am
> >> >> > unable to get my spec to pass though I know it is working fine as my
> >> >> > cucumber features are passing
>
> >> >> > old rails way:
>
> >> >> > def show
> >> >> > @order = Order.find(params[:id])
> >> >> > end
>
> >> >> > new rails way collection-based:
>
> >> >> > def show
> >> >> > id = params[:id]
> >> >> > @order = @user.orders.find(id)
>
> >> >> This code is inherently untestable in an isolated/granular way. Your
> >> >> options are:
>
> >> >> * write higher level specs that use real data
> >> >>   * pros: simplicity and clarity in both code and specs
> >> >>   * cons: brittle due to runtime dependency on correct models, runs slow
>
> >> >> * write a very invasive spec with complex setup and instance_eval to
> >> >> set up the @user
> >> >>   * pros: runs fast, no runtime dependency on correct models
> >> >>   * cons: brittle due to dependency on internals, complex
>
> >> >> * refactor the code to make it easier to spec
> >> >>   * pros: more highly decoupled code, simpler specs, fast
> >> >>   * cons: more work up front, may disregard some of what Rails has to offer
>
> >> >> Note that the first two options are both brittle, but for different
> >> >> reasons. The first is brittle due to a runtime dependency. That means
> >> >> that when you run the spec the model has to be working correctly for
> >> >> the spec to pass, and a failure could be due to a problem in the model
> >> >> or in the controller.
>
> >> >> The second is due to a code dependency. That means that when you want
> >> >> to change this code, the spec will have to change as well. This is
> >> >> true of any case in which you use mocks or stubs to varying degrees,
> >> >> and that comes with its own tradeoffs. In this case, the necessary
> >> >> stubbing would be complex and invasive enough that it would be a
> >> >> concern to me.
>
> >> >> Getting to your original question - what does your spec look like now,
> >> >> and what failure message are you getting?
>
> >> >> Cheers,
> >> >> David
>
> >> >> > rescue
> >> >> > redirect_to :action => "index"
> >> >> > end
> >> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >> > rspec-users mailing list
> >> >> > rspec-us... at rubyforge.org
> >> >> >http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> rspec-users mailing list
> >> >> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > rspec-users mailing list
> >> > rspec-us... at rubyforge.org
> >> >http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> rspec-users mailing list
> >> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-us... at rubyforge.org
> >http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


More information about the rspec-users mailing list