[rspec-users] rspec-orm and _not_ mocking models

Costa Shapiro costa at mouldwarp.com
Sat Jul 24 22:39:55 EDT 2010


I'm sorry, I'd like to clarify my statement about the model, view and
controller (spec) separation.

>From my perspective, model is an abstract definition which is a spec
for itself; view interacts with controller under the model contract,
and all the "model" code is actually low-level controller code which
makes the high-level code work. Alternatively, it can be trivially
said that the database state is equivalent to a sequence of controller
requests.
Hence the inclination to see the least model-related code in specs.

Thanks,
Costa.

On 21 July 2010 17:28, Costa Shapiro <costa at mouldwarp.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> (Surprisingly?) I find mocking AR (DM less so) in specs extremely tedious
> _and_ intrusive.
>
> Having said this, I find the approach of top-down VCM speccing very
> legitimate (cucumber for V, rspec for C, and probably unit tests for M).
> That is, a model is an inherent though separate part of the controller and
> trying to spec just the controller lacks efficiency (pragmatism) and leads
> to frustration.
>
> Therefore, I've starting working on http://github.com/costa/rspec-orm
> (everything is of concept-quality there, including the name). It's already
> "working for me".
> I think the README there pretty much cuts it, so I'd just welcome the
> comments here.
> Note that — I'm sorry — the code is not only unpackaged, but it is in a
> separate http://github.com/costa/dev/tree/master/ruby/ in part (for a
> reason).
>
> Again, *any* feedback is appreciated.
>
> Cheers,
> Costa.
>


More information about the rspec-users mailing list