[rspec-users] First Post (Best Practices)

Ants Pants antsmailinglist at gmail.com
Thu May 13 11:10:41 EDT 2010

Thanks for so much information that I will look into.

I was aware of using Cucumber/Webrat for this purpose but I'm doing things
the long way until it feels  unnatural. This way, I'll be in the position to
weigh up the pros and cons of a best approach in the future.

For now, I'll leave the fields in the loop as I'd like to be able to see the
wood for the trees.

Thanks for the tip between {} and [] as coming form Perl, I just thought
they were the delimiters. Still got a lot to learn on all fronts.

Again, thanks.


On 13 May 2010 15:18, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:

> On May 13, 2010, at 6:41 AM, Ants Pants wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I'm just working my way through the RSpec/Cucumber book, I love the tool
> but not so much the learning curve :(
> Welcome! We're here to help.
> > Starting with my first view, is it okay for me, in the BDD world, to do
> the following or can I put them all in one 'it' block to save on having to
> render the page every time. Or must they be in separate blocks with separate
> renders? Or is there a fourth more elegant solution?
> >
> >   %w{ name address_1 address_2 address_3 postcode town_city state country
> email phone www }.each do |field|
> >     it "renders form field #{field} to create a new competition" do
> >       @competition.stub!(field.intern).and_return ''
> >       render "competitions/new.html.erb"
> >       response.should have_selector("input[type=text]", :name =>
> "competition[#{field}]", :value => '')
> >     end
> >   end
> >
> > Is it okay to post this type of  question if nothing jumps out at me
> after googling?
> Yes! And thanks for googling first.
> There is a guideline that comes from TDD that there should be one
> expectation per example. This is not a law, and is not necessarily the best
> way to go every time. One benefit is that it's easier to read the examples
> and understand what they're specifying. Another is that when we make a
> change in the implementation that results in an example failing, if there
> are multiple expectations that should fail, we learn more if they're all in
> separate examples than if they're all piled up in one example.
> In terms of iterating through a list of fields, I personally do it all the
> time and it rarely causes any pain _as long as it is only one level deep_.
> If you start nesting these, you're in for a world of pain when new
> requirements come in that point to a change in behaviour, because you have
> to start teasing things apart.
> Another approach to the same issue would be a custom matcher:
> Rspec::Matchers.define :have_text_field_named do |name|
>  match do |response|
>    response.should have_selector("input[type=text]", :name =>
> "competition[#{name}]", :value => '')
>  end
>  failure_message_for_should do |response|
>    "expected text field named #{name}, got:\n#{response.body.inspect}"
>  end
> end
> Now you can say:
> describe "competitions/new.html.erb" do
>  describe "form fields" do
>    before(:each) do
>      assigns[:competition] = double('competition').as_null_object
>    end
>    %w[name address_1 address_2 address_3 postcode town_city state country
> email phone www].each do |field|
>       it "renders a #{field} field to create a new competition" do
>        render
>        response.should have_text_field_named(field)
>      end
>    end
>  end
> end
> Notes:
> - using as_null_object means you don't have to stub out the methods on the
> competition
> - if you pass the path to the template file as the first argument to the
> outermost call to describe(), render() will render it implicitly, so it
> doesn't need to be in the example as well.
> - code in the example is now focused on what is unique to that example
> - I prefer to use %w[] over %w{} because it creates an array, not a hash or
> a lambda :)
> All of this said, there is a general trend away from view specs in light of
> the Cucumber + (Webrat || Capybara) equation. My personal feeling is that
> it's important to know how to use them because they are very useful from
> time to time. But that's only one opinion.
> HTH,
> David
> > Thanks
> >
> > ants
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20100513/99dcb510/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the rspec-users mailing list