From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Thu Mar  1 05:04:00 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 00:04:00 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] issues when trying to select an option in a drop down
	list
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuNAVRkwgfmiRMr2JLeJZ4W+tk+SgAYvWyW2XkHnr8veqQ@mail.gmail.com>

My html looks like:

<select id="account_car_type" name="account[car_type]"><option value="6
">Acura</option> <option value="7">Honda</option> <option value="8">Ford
</option> <option value="9">Toyota</option> <option value="10">GM</option>
</select>
My requests spec looks like:

before do
  select '7', :from => "account[car_type]"
  fill_in ..
  ..

end

I get the error message:

 Failure/Error: select '7', :from => "account[car_type]"
     Capybara::ElementNotFound:
       cannot select option, no option with text '7' in select box
'account[car_type]'
     # (eval):2:in `select'
     # ./spec/requests/account_pages_spec.rb:13:in `block (4 levels) in
<top (required)>'


I also tried:

select 'Honda', :from => "account[car_type]"

And got the same type of error.

What am I doing wrong here?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120301/c6d64312/attachment.html>

From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Thu Mar  1 05:19:18 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 00:19:18 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] tests using factorygirl
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuP0kLNXT6LxdBTOLmZf9V_TLYsd9sw9rfrFR8ivcy-g3Q@mail.gmail.com>

I'm trying to use factory for a test case, but the model I am creating via
the factory depends on another model, how do you setup a factory like this?

Model Account has a location_id attribute (where Location is another model)

So how do I set it?

FactoryGirl..... do

  location_id  ????????/

end
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120301/0d3367fb/attachment.html>

From ben at benatkin.com  Thu Mar  1 05:56:12 2012
From: ben at benatkin.com (Ben Atkin)
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:56:12 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] issues when trying to select an option in a drop
 down list
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuNAVRkwgfmiRMr2JLeJZ4W+tk+SgAYvWyW2XkHnr8veqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuNAVRkwgfmiRMr2JLeJZ4W+tk+SgAYvWyW2XkHnr8veqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+ysARLmUo8_ENtCQRC5SSawk54SCns2kPvhKs-hSrSGvNS+8w@mail.gmail.com>

>From reading the error and the docs, it sounds like the last one:

select 'Honda', :from => "account[car_type]"

...should work. The one thing I can think of that might keep it from
working would be not being scoped to an area that includes the select box.
Perhaps you could install pry and add binding.pry above that line, and then
run it, and then poke around in the repl and see if you've got the right
context. You did make the request to get that page, right?

Ben

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:04 PM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:

> My html looks like:
>
> <select id="account_car_type" name="account[car_type]"><option value="6
> ">Acura</option> <option value="7">Honda</option> <option value="8">Ford
> </option> <option value="9">Toyota</option> <option value="10">GM</option>
> </select>
> My requests spec looks like:
>
> before do
>   select '7', :from => "account[car_type]"
>   fill_in ..
>   ..
>
> end
>
> I get the error message:
>
>  Failure/Error: select '7', :from => "account[car_type]"
>      Capybara::ElementNotFound:
>        cannot select option, no option with text '7' in select box
> 'account[car_type]'
>      # (eval):2:in `select'
>      # ./spec/requests/account_pages_spec.rb:13:in `block (4 levels) in
> <top (required)>'
>
>
> I also tried:
>
> select 'Honda', :from => "account[car_type]"
>
> And got the same type of error.
>
> What am I doing wrong here?
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120229/51a0625d/attachment.html>

From ben at benatkin.com  Thu Mar  1 06:02:43 2012
From: ben at benatkin.com (Ben Atkin)
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 23:02:43 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] tests using factorygirl
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuP0kLNXT6LxdBTOLmZf9V_TLYsd9sw9rfrFR8ivcy-g3Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuP0kLNXT6LxdBTOLmZf9V_TLYsd9sw9rfrFR8ivcy-g3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+ysARK52vQ0rYdJ7yj+T+-i64FFqJUR5FSa7oa6rGhC8LVNog@mail.gmail.com>

Here is the relevant documentation:

http://rdoc.info/github/thoughtbot/factory_girl/file/GETTING_STARTED.md#Associations

Or if it already exists you might try:

FactoryGirl.define :account do
  location { Location.where("city = ?", 'Austin').first }
end

(The code in the block just needs to return a single Location, and since
it's run within a block it's delayed until the spec is run, rather than at
load time.)

Ben

On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:19 PM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm trying to use factory for a test case, but the model I am creating via
> the factory depends on another model, how do you setup a factory like this?
>
> Model Account has a location_id attribute (where Location is another model)
>
> So how do I set it?
>
> FactoryGirl..... do
>
>   location_id  ????????/
>
> end
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120229/3f742554/attachment-0001.html>

From julian at leviston.net  Thu Mar  1 05:35:51 2012
From: julian at leviston.net (Julian Leviston)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 16:35:51 +1100
Subject: [rspec-users] tests using factorygirl
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuP0kLNXT6LxdBTOLmZf9V_TLYsd9sw9rfrFR8ivcy-g3Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuP0kLNXT6LxdBTOLmZf9V_TLYsd9sw9rfrFR8ivcy-g3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <56EBA3D0-8908-48AC-88F7-42BC2DC7A497@leviston.net>

Nah I had this issue, too... use this

FactoryGirl.... do
assocation :location, etc. (look it up)
end

On 01/03/2012, at 4:19 PM, S Ahmed wrote:

> I'm trying to use factory for a test case, but the model I am creating via the factory depends on another model, how do you setup a factory like this?
> 
> Model Account has a location_id attribute (where Location is another model)
> 
> So how do I set it?
> 
> FactoryGirl..... do
> 
>   location_id  ????????/
> 
> end
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From lists at ruby-forum.com  Thu Mar  1 10:00:56 2012
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (bernhard stoecker)
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 11:00:56 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] using fakeweb only if flag is given
Message-ID: <08c71a357c8dbad3d7a04bb161df9320@ruby-forum.com>

Hi,

I'm using the gem fakeweb to simulate the comunication between my
ruby-app and different other apps when running my rspecs. The advantage
is, that the specs work much faster and it is not nessessary that the
other apps are currently avalable. But for testing the integration of my
app, it is of course nessessary to check weather my component is
compatible with the others. What im searching is something like a flag
to the comment bundle exec rspec spec e.g. bundle exec rspec spec --fake
do decide to run fakeweb or not. Does something like this exist and if
so how can I realize this.

Best regards

Bernhard

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Mar  1 11:51:12 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 05:51:12 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] using fakeweb only if flag is given
In-Reply-To: <08c71a357c8dbad3d7a04bb161df9320@ruby-forum.com>
References: <08c71a357c8dbad3d7a04bb161df9320@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <789EBB4A-2858-41DA-8E40-3D28897604B2@gmail.com>

On Mar 1, 2012, at 4:00 AM, bernhard stoecker wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I'm using the gem fakeweb to simulate the comunication between my
> ruby-app and different other apps when running my rspecs. The advantage
> is, that the specs work much faster and it is not nessessary that the
> other apps are currently avalable. But for testing the integration of my
> app, it is of course nessessary to check weather my component is
> compatible with the others. What im searching is something like a flag
> to the comment bundle exec rspec spec e.g. bundle exec rspec spec --fake
> do decide to run fakeweb or not. Does something like this exist and if
> so how can I realize this.

You could use tags for this:

# CLI
rspec --tags allow_net_connect

# spec/spec_helper.rb
RSpec.configure do |c|
  c.treat_symbols_as_metadata_keys_with_true_values = true
end

# spec
describe "integration with real service", :allow_web_connect do
  # ...
end

HTH,
David

From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Thu Mar  1 17:19:53 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 12:19:53 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] issues when trying to select an option in a drop
 down list
In-Reply-To: <CA+ysARLmUo8_ENtCQRC5SSawk54SCns2kPvhKs-hSrSGvNS+8w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuNAVRkwgfmiRMr2JLeJZ4W+tk+SgAYvWyW2XkHnr8veqQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+ysARLmUo8_ENtCQRC5SSawk54SCns2kPvhKs-hSrSGvNS+8w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuPQtOLK5A55wHkX+fG1HSc8ubbOVQUw+Fg_HHTk+x3qLA@mail.gmail.com>

Yes I made the request, my test case was working fine with all my other
fields.

I just added the dropdown list and updated the test case, and it can't seem
to find the element.

On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 12:56 AM, Ben Atkin <ben at benatkin.com> wrote:

> >From reading the error and the docs, it sounds like the last one:
>
> select 'Honda', :from => "account[car_type]"
>
> ...should work. The one thing I can think of that might keep it from
> working would be not being scoped to an area that includes the select box.
> Perhaps you could install pry and add binding.pry above that line, and then
> run it, and then poke around in the repl and see if you've got the right
> context. You did make the request to get that page, right?
>
> Ben
>
> On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 10:04 PM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My html looks like:
>>
>> <select id="account_car_type" name="account[car_type]"><option value="6
>> ">Acura</option> <option value="7">Honda</option> <option value="8">Ford
>> </option> <option value="9">Toyota</option> <option value="10">GM
>> </option></select>
>> My requests spec looks like:
>>
>> before do
>>   select '7', :from => "account[car_type]"
>>   fill_in ..
>>   ..
>>
>> end
>>
>> I get the error message:
>>
>>  Failure/Error: select '7', :from => "account[car_type]"
>>      Capybara::ElementNotFound:
>>        cannot select option, no option with text '7' in select box
>> 'account[car_type]'
>>      # (eval):2:in `select'
>>      # ./spec/requests/account_pages_spec.rb:13:in `block (4 levels) in
>> <top (required)>'
>>
>>
>> I also tried:
>>
>> select 'Honda', :from => "account[car_type]"
>>
>> And got the same type of error.
>>
>> What am I doing wrong here?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120301/ac45ab11/attachment.html>

From fourcatrails at gmail.com  Thu Mar  1 16:43:43 2012
From: fourcatrails at gmail.com (Mike Kim)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 08:43:43 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing selector order
Message-ID: <644b2af7-1798-4179-be92-5f60c2083605@b1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>

Could someone point me to a reference that explains how I would test
the order of elements on an HTML page?

For example, in RSpec I would like to verify that the content of one
<p> element appears before the content of another.

response.should have_selector("p", :content => "Should appear first")
response.should have_selector("p", :content => "Should appear second")

The two lines above test that the 2 contents appear, but I don't know
how to test that the first content appears before the second.

Thanks

Mike

From apremdas at gmail.com  Thu Mar  1 21:31:52 2012
From: apremdas at gmail.com (Andrew Premdas)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 21:31:52 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing selector order
In-Reply-To: <644b2af7-1798-4179-be92-5f60c2083605@b1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
References: <644b2af7-1798-4179-be92-5f60c2083605@b1g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <CAMxjd8PTq-cuK8XYqby+voUr8Qm=p_RDQ2aisfWsYN+9k2BAiw@mail.gmail.com>

On 1 March 2012 16:43, Mike Kim <fourcatrails at gmail.com> wrote:

> Could someone point me to a reference that explains how I would test
> the order of elements on an HTML page?
>
> For example, in RSpec I would like to verify that the content of one
> <p> element appears before the content of another.
>
> response.should have_selector("p", :content => "Should appear first")
> response.should have_selector("p", :content => "Should appear second")
>
> The two lines above test that the 2 contents appear, but I don't know
> how to test that the first content appears before the second.
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>


Have a look at sibling in x-path specification to do it correctly. As a
hack Capybara's all method in practice will return the paragraphs in order
(but this isn't guaranteed by specification).

HTH

Andrew

------------------------
Andrew Premdas
blog.andrew.premdas.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120301/18582b8a/attachment.html>

From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Fri Mar  2 03:33:45 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 22:33:45 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] can I output the html of the page after calling
	click_button?
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuOWkR2VyVx6=_McrUaqxajNCe6qRt__uTkj2ix1FcoRNA@mail.gmail.com>

I am not sure why my form submission is failing (request test).

I am calling:

# form is filled in a 'before do' block.

it "should create an account" do
  expect { click_button "Create" }.to change(Account, :count).by(1)
end

Could I somehow view the HTML after the click_button call?

Manually submitting the form works fine for me, so I'm confused.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120301/44df4ad0/attachment-0001.html>

From apremdas at gmail.com  Fri Mar  2 11:23:44 2012
From: apremdas at gmail.com (Andrew Premdas)
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 11:23:44 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] can I output the html of the page after calling
	click_button?
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuOWkR2VyVx6=_McrUaqxajNCe6qRt__uTkj2ix1FcoRNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuOWkR2VyVx6=_McrUaqxajNCe6qRt__uTkj2ix1FcoRNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAMxjd8P1CgXd9yYixHR4hAZPWEsZBKvmJNb1wQfqpOjRGQ2cpA@mail.gmail.com>

see below

On 2 March 2012 03:33, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I am not sure why my form submission is failing (request test).
>
> I am calling:
>
> # form is filled in a 'before do' block.
>
> it "should create an account" do
>   expect { click_button "Create" }.to change(Account, :count).by(1)
>

put a debugger statement here

  debugger
  1 # so the debugger doesn't drop into rspec

end
>
> Could I somehow view the HTML after the click_button call?
>
> Manually submitting the form works fine for me, so I'm confused.
>
>
Now you can

1) Look at the html directly e.g. > page.body
2) Output the page.body in a pretty way perhaps using Coderay
3) Use irb to do all sorts of other thing


Alternatively use capybara' save_and_open_page

HTH

Andrew
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120302/23e94b78/attachment.html>

From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Sat Mar  3 19:35:52 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 14:35:52 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] mimicking a logged in user
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuNMFxYQz5ZWBiLuFSXU0YegcWRTzauRnjpgfXmtFU5zZw@mail.gmail.com>

I'm testing my controller, and confirming that a logged-in user can view
the page.

I have a session_helper that does this:

def signed_in?
    !current_user.nil?
end

And the current_user is set with:

def user_from_remember_token
    remember_token = cookies[:remember_token]
    User.find_by_remember_token(remember_token) unless remember_token.nil?
end


So in my controller, I need to fake a login somehow, how should I go about
doing this?

I'm not sure if this is the best place for it, but so far what I tried was
creating a method in my spec_helper's config block:

def test_sign_in(user)
   controller.sign_in(user)
end

(I get my user object from factorygirl).

So my controller_spec looks like:


describe "index" do
    before(:each) do
      @user = Factory(:user)
      test_sign_in(@user)
    end

    it "should be successful" do
      get 'index'
      controller.current_user.should == @user
      response.should be_success
    end
  end


It is failing with current_user being nil.

Should I just somehow stub the call to 'user_from_remember_token' to return
the factorygirl user?
How can I do this?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120303/8e31f1ad/attachment.html>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sat Mar  3 21:55:55 2012
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Greg C.)
Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2012 22:55:55 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] what RSpec approach could I use for this.
Message-ID: <6154714fb3078c63792ba09e24c7190f@ruby-forum.com>

Background:  So I have roughly:

class A
   def calculate_input_datetimes
      # do stuff to calculate datetimes - then for each one identified
      process_datetimes(my_datetime_start, my_datetime_end)
   end

   def process_datetimes(input_datetime_start, input_datetime_end)
      # do stuff
   end
end

So:
* I want to test that calculate_input_datetimes algorithms are working
and calculating the correct datetimes to pass to process_datetimes
* I know I can STUB out process_datetimes so that it's code won't be
involved in the test

QUESTION:  How can I setup the rspec test however so I can specifically
test that the correct datestimes were attempted to be passed over to
process_datetimes,  So for a given spec test that process_datetimes was
called three (3) times say with the following parameters passed:

* 2012-03-03T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-09T23:59:59+00:00
* 2012-03-10T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-16T23:59:59+00:00
* 2012-03-17T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-23T23:59:59+00:00


thanks

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From jko170 at gmail.com  Sat Mar  3 22:21:49 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 15:21:49 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] mimicking a logged in user
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuNMFxYQz5ZWBiLuFSXU0YegcWRTzauRnjpgfXmtFU5zZw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuNMFxYQz5ZWBiLuFSXU0YegcWRTzauRnjpgfXmtFU5zZw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <97674CF8-C8AA-4C0C-A49F-2AB2EB4225DB@gmail.com>


On Mar 3, 2012, at 12:35 PM, S Ahmed wrote:

> I'm testing my controller, and confirming that a logged-in user can view the page.
> 
> I have a session_helper that does this:
> 
> def signed_in?
>     !current_user.nil?
> end
> 
> And the current_user is set with:
> 
> def user_from_remember_token
>     remember_token = cookies[:remember_token]
>     User.find_by_remember_token(remember_token) unless remember_token.nil?
> end
> 
> 
> So in my controller, I need to fake a login somehow, how should I go about doing this?
> 
> I'm not sure if this is the best place for it, but so far what I tried was creating a method in my spec_helper's config block:
> 
> def test_sign_in(user)
>    controller.sign_in(user)
> end
> 
> (I get my user object from factorygirl).
> 
> So my controller_spec looks like:
> 
> 
> describe "index" do
>     before(:each) do
>       @user = Factory(:user)
>       test_sign_in(@user)
>     end
>     
>     it "should be successful" do
>       get 'index'
>       controller.current_user.should == @user
>       response.should be_success
>     end
>   end
> 
> 
> It is failing with current_user being nil.
> 
> Should I just somehow stub the call to 'user_from_remember_token' to return the factorygirl user?
> How can I do this?
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

Just set the :remember_token cookie:

https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-rails/docs/controller-specs/cookies

From jko170 at gmail.com  Sat Mar  3 22:29:26 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 15:29:26 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] what RSpec approach could I use for this.
In-Reply-To: <6154714fb3078c63792ba09e24c7190f@ruby-forum.com>
References: <6154714fb3078c63792ba09e24c7190f@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <C1FAC857-5C71-41DB-B918-97D2D7915F42@gmail.com>


On Mar 3, 2012, at 2:55 PM, Greg C. wrote:

> Background:  So I have roughly:
> 
> class A
>   def calculate_input_datetimes
>      # do stuff to calculate datetimes - then for each one identified
>      process_datetimes(my_datetime_start, my_datetime_end)
>   end
> 
>   def process_datetimes(input_datetime_start, input_datetime_end)
>      # do stuff
>   end
> end
> 
> So:
> * I want to test that calculate_input_datetimes algorithms are working
> and calculating the correct datetimes to pass to process_datetimes
> * I know I can STUB out process_datetimes so that it's code won't be
> involved in the test
> 
> QUESTION:  How can I setup the rspec test however so I can specifically
> test that the correct datestimes were attempted to be passed over to
> process_datetimes,  So for a given spec test that process_datetimes was
> called three (3) times say with the following parameters passed:
> 
> * 2012-03-03T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-09T23:59:59+00:00
> * 2012-03-10T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-16T23:59:59+00:00
> * 2012-03-17T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-23T23:59:59+00:00
> 
> 
> thanks
> 
> -- 
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

Setup 3 individual expectations:

a_instance.should_receive(:process_datetimes).with(input_datetime_start_1, datetime_end_1).once.ordered
a_instance.should_receive(:process_datetimes).with(input_datetime_start_2, datetime_end_2).once.ordered

Your 2 methods should be tested in isolation (unless #process_datetimes is private). So for #calculate_input_datetimes, just ensure that #process_datetimes is called with the correct arguments. The, test #processs_datetimes in isolation.


From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Sun Mar  4 04:04:58 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 23:04:58 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] mimicking a logged in user
In-Reply-To: <97674CF8-C8AA-4C0C-A49F-2AB2EB4225DB@gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuNMFxYQz5ZWBiLuFSXU0YegcWRTzauRnjpgfXmtFU5zZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<97674CF8-C8AA-4C0C-A49F-2AB2EB4225DB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuOE+JwX2zzOp0LmSZvN0CE6s33zciyYPK5WFZmMjJ_0gA@mail.gmail.com>

thanks.

but I have to stub the call that hits the database also.

how can I wrap this up in a function so I can use it everywhere in my tests
where I require a logged in user?
where should I put this? in spec_helper?

On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Justin Ko <jko170 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> On Mar 3, 2012, at 12:35 PM, S Ahmed wrote:
>
> > I'm testing my controller, and confirming that a logged-in user can view
> the page.
> >
> > I have a session_helper that does this:
> >
> > def signed_in?
> >     !current_user.nil?
> > end
> >
> > And the current_user is set with:
> >
> > def user_from_remember_token
> >     remember_token = cookies[:remember_token]
> >     User.find_by_remember_token(remember_token) unless
> remember_token.nil?
> > end
> >
> >
> > So in my controller, I need to fake a login somehow, how should I go
> about doing this?
> >
> > I'm not sure if this is the best place for it, but so far what I tried
> was creating a method in my spec_helper's config block:
> >
> > def test_sign_in(user)
> >    controller.sign_in(user)
> > end
> >
> > (I get my user object from factorygirl).
> >
> > So my controller_spec looks like:
> >
> >
> > describe "index" do
> >     before(:each) do
> >       @user = Factory(:user)
> >       test_sign_in(@user)
> >     end
> >
> >     it "should be successful" do
> >       get 'index'
> >       controller.current_user.should == @user
> >       response.should be_success
> >     end
> >   end
> >
> >
> > It is failing with current_user being nil.
> >
> > Should I just somehow stub the call to 'user_from_remember_token' to
> return the factorygirl user?
> > How can I do this?
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> Just set the :remember_token cookie:
>
> https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-rails/docs/controller-specs/cookies
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120303/b99eb45a/attachment-0001.html>

From myron.marston at gmail.com  Sun Mar  4 07:37:24 2012
From: myron.marston at gmail.com (Myron Marston)
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 23:37:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rspec-users] Request for comments: additional new expectation
	syntax
Message-ID: <22eb9dcb-098f-4cf3-a12f-1b22d20ca3d4@x7g2000pbi.googlegroups.com>

I've opened a pull request with an initial implementation of using
`expect` to set normal expectations in addition to block ones:

expect(something).to be_awesome

Note that it's not simply the syntax change that's driving the
possibility of introducing this.  It's the fact that the `should` and
`should_not` syntax has occasionally been prone to problems that the
`expect` syntax would avoid entirely.

It'd be great to get feedback from other RSpec users about this.
Here's the pull request:

https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/pull/119

Please leave comments there.  I don't often have time to keep up with
the rspec mailing list so I likely won't see comments here.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sun Mar  4 08:55:39 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 02:55:39 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] what RSpec approach could I use for this.
In-Reply-To: <C1FAC857-5C71-41DB-B918-97D2D7915F42@gmail.com>
References: <6154714fb3078c63792ba09e24c7190f@ruby-forum.com>
	<C1FAC857-5C71-41DB-B918-97D2D7915F42@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWQ2Q8j2U8y8uJZbmX+22DrszPBnfh6g+kAqNojbJ6xYgA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Justin Ko <jko170 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 3, 2012, at 2:55 PM, Greg C. wrote:
>
>> Background: ?So I have roughly:
>>
>> class A
>> ? def calculate_input_datetimes
>> ? ? ?# do stuff to calculate datetimes - then for each one identified
>> ? ? ?process_datetimes(my_datetime_start, my_datetime_end)
>> ? end
>>
>> ? def process_datetimes(input_datetime_start, input_datetime_end)
>> ? ? ?# do stuff
>> ? end
>> end
>>
>> So:
>> * I want to test that calculate_input_datetimes algorithms are working
>> and calculating the correct datetimes to pass to process_datetimes
>> * I know I can STUB out process_datetimes so that it's code won't be
>> involved in the test
>>
>> QUESTION: ?How can I setup the rspec test however so I can specifically
>> test that the correct datestimes were attempted to be passed over to
>> process_datetimes, ?So for a given spec test that process_datetimes was
>> called three (3) times say with the following parameters passed:
>>
>> * 2012-03-03T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-09T23:59:59+00:00
>> * 2012-03-10T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-16T23:59:59+00:00
>> * 2012-03-17T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-23T23:59:59+00:00
> Setup 3 individual expectations:
>
> a_instance.should_receive(:process_datetimes).with(input_datetime_start_1, datetime_end_1).once.ordered
> a_instance.should_receive(:process_datetimes).with(input_datetime_start_2, datetime_end_2).once.ordered
>
> Your 2 methods should be tested in isolation (unless #process_datetimes is private). So for #calculate_input_datetimes, just ensure that #process_datetimes is called with the correct arguments. The, test #processs_datetimes in isolation.

Stubbing internals of the subject of the example can hide subtle bugs.
I'd just specify this in terms of initial state and output of
calculate_input_datetimes. I'll be more specific if you will (i.e.
what does this object/method actually do)?

From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Sun Mar  4 13:40:57 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 08:40:57 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] testing sessions
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuN1Acg3KurLfErHSomCYxvdkmMuTY-aDfBzcxJ7aTsDng@mail.gmail.com>

I want to test if my sessions logic works.

Session:
 id
 user_id

When I create a new session, if there was a previous session row in the db
with user_id = xxx, it should delete it first, then create a new row.

How could I test this scenerio?

So far I have:

require 'spec_helper'

describe Session do
  let(:session) { FactoryGirl.create(:session) }
  subject { session }
  it { should be_valid }

  describe "a new session" do
    s1 = FactoryGirl.build(:session)
    s2 = FactoryGirl.build(:session)
    user = FactoryGirl.create(:user)

    s1.user_id = user.id
    s1.save!
    #should change(Session, :count).by(1)
  end
end

I can't seem to figure out how to use the "should change Session count by
1".
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120304/17372ba1/attachment.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sun Mar  4 18:34:22 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 12:34:22 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] testing sessions
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuN1Acg3KurLfErHSomCYxvdkmMuTY-aDfBzcxJ7aTsDng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuN1Acg3KurLfErHSomCYxvdkmMuTY-aDfBzcxJ7aTsDng@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWS+NXak3Wzny3iHTy8ugkVp=rVKtTp9YjxyOU6YxSsE1g@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 7:40 AM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I want to test if my sessions logic works.
>
> Session:
> ?id
> ?user_id
>
> When I create a new session, if there was a previous session row in the db
> with user_id = xxx, it should delete it first, then create a new row.
>
> How could I test this scenerio?
>
> So far I have:
>
> require 'spec_helper'
>
> describe Session do
> ? let(:session) { FactoryGirl.create(:session) }
> ? subject { session }
> ? it { should be_valid }
>
> ? describe "a new session" do
> ? ? s1 = FactoryGirl.build(:session)
> ? ? s2 = FactoryGirl.build(:session)
> ? ? user = FactoryGirl.create(:user)
>
> ? ? s1.user_id = user.id
> ? ? s1.save!
> ? ? #should change(Session, :count).by(1)
> ? end
> end
>
> I can't seem to figure out how to use the "should change Session count by
> 1".

First - read the docs at
http://rubydoc.info/gems/rspec-expectations/RSpec/Matchers:change to
learn how to use the `change` matcher properly. Also look at
http://rubydoc.info/gems/rspec-expectations/RSpec/Matchers:expect so
you'll understand my suggestion below.

Second - you say above "When I create a new session, if there was a
previous session row in the db with user_id = xxx, it should delete it
first, then create a new row." This suggests that you want
Session.count _not_ to change at all:

user = FactoryGirl(:user)
session = FactoryGirl(:session, :user_id => user.id)
expect { session.save! }.not_to change(Session, :count)

HTH,
David

From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Sun Mar  4 21:46:28 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 16:46:28 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] testing sessions
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWS+NXak3Wzny3iHTy8ugkVp=rVKtTp9YjxyOU6YxSsE1g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuN1Acg3KurLfErHSomCYxvdkmMuTY-aDfBzcxJ7aTsDng@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKw-oWS+NXak3Wzny3iHTy8ugkVp=rVKtTp9YjxyOU6YxSsE1g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuN5gmdKrvrVV+Rb4ZrseHrLb++i3cFiwMXiBfdK+sLVPg@mail.gmail.com>

great thanks.

should a var created in a block be reachable outside the block?

it "...." do
  expect { session = Session.......   }.not_to change(Session, :count)
  session.guid.should xxxx
end

I tried that but was a bit confused, whatever is in the expect block is
isolated right?

On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 7:40 AM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I want to test if my sessions logic works.
> >
> > Session:
> >  id
> >  user_id
> >
> > When I create a new session, if there was a previous session row in the
> db
> > with user_id = xxx, it should delete it first, then create a new row.
> >
> > How could I test this scenerio?
> >
> > So far I have:
> >
> > require 'spec_helper'
> >
> > describe Session do
> >   let(:session) { FactoryGirl.create(:session) }
> >   subject { session }
> >   it { should be_valid }
> >
> >   describe "a new session" do
> >     s1 = FactoryGirl.build(:session)
> >     s2 = FactoryGirl.build(:session)
> >     user = FactoryGirl.create(:user)
> >
> >     s1.user_id = user.id
> >     s1.save!
> >     #should change(Session, :count).by(1)
> >   end
> > end
> >
> > I can't seem to figure out how to use the "should change Session count by
> > 1".
>
> First - read the docs at
> http://rubydoc.info/gems/rspec-expectations/RSpec/Matchers:change to
> learn how to use the `change` matcher properly. Also look at
> http://rubydoc.info/gems/rspec-expectations/RSpec/Matchers:expect so
> you'll understand my suggestion below.
>
> Second - you say above "When I create a new session, if there was a
> previous session row in the db with user_id = xxx, it should delete it
> first, then create a new row." This suggests that you want
> Session.count _not_ to change at all:
>
> user = FactoryGirl(:user)
> session = FactoryGirl(:session, :user_id => user.id)
> expect { session.save! }.not_to change(Session, :count)
>
> HTH,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120304/34095b0a/attachment.html>

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Sun Mar  4 22:15:43 2012
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2012 17:15:43 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] testing sessions
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuN5gmdKrvrVV+Rb4ZrseHrLb++i3cFiwMXiBfdK+sLVPg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuN1Acg3KurLfErHSomCYxvdkmMuTY-aDfBzcxJ7aTsDng@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKw-oWS+NXak3Wzny3iHTy8ugkVp=rVKtTp9YjxyOU6YxSsE1g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAG2rwuN5gmdKrvrVV+Rb4ZrseHrLb++i3cFiwMXiBfdK+sLVPg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+e84E2X=VQSg-SBJ-C_XKmKdeZc7iwOngOk9smWWjP6wrMHeg@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 4:46 PM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
> great thanks.
>
> should a var created in a block be reachable outside the block?

Nope, not unless you defined the variable outside of the block to start with.

>
> it "...." do
> ? expect { session = Session....... ? }.not_to change(Session, :count)
> ? session.guid.should xxxx
> end
>
> I tried that but was a bit confused, whatever is in the expect block is
> isolated right?

Correct. Currently your session variable is only scoped to the block
that is passed to "expect". Anything outside of that block doesn't
know anything about the session variable.

Zach

>
>
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 1:34 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 7:40 AM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I want to test if my sessions logic works.
>> >
>> > Session:
>> > ?id
>> > ?user_id
>> >
>> > When I create a new session, if there was a previous session row in the
>> > db
>> > with user_id = xxx, it should delete it first, then create a new row.
>> >
>> > How could I test this scenerio?
>> >
>> > So far I have:
>> >
>> > require 'spec_helper'
>> >
>> > describe Session do
>> > ? let(:session) { FactoryGirl.create(:session) }
>> > ? subject { session }
>> > ? it { should be_valid }
>> >
>> > ? describe "a new session" do
>> > ? ? s1 = FactoryGirl.build(:session)
>> > ? ? s2 = FactoryGirl.build(:session)
>> > ? ? user = FactoryGirl.create(:user)
>> >
>> > ? ? s1.user_id = user.id
>> > ? ? s1.save!
>> > ? ? #should change(Session, :count).by(1)
>> > ? end
>> > end
>> >
>> > I can't seem to figure out how to use the "should change Session count
>> > by
>> > 1".
>>
>> First - read the docs at
>> http://rubydoc.info/gems/rspec-expectations/RSpec/Matchers:change to
>> learn how to use the `change` matcher properly. Also look at
>> http://rubydoc.info/gems/rspec-expectations/RSpec/Matchers:expect so
>> you'll understand my suggestion below.
>>
>> Second - you say above "When I create a new session, if there was a
>> previous session row in the db with user_id = xxx, it should delete it
>> first, then create a new row." This suggests that you want
>> Session.count _not_ to change at all:
>>
>> user = FactoryGirl(:user)
>> session = FactoryGirl(:session, :user_id => user.id)
>> expect { session.save! }.not_to change(Session, :count)
>>
>> HTH,
>> David
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users



-- 

--
@zachdennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com

From apremdas at gmail.com  Mon Mar  5 12:05:28 2012
From: apremdas at gmail.com (Andrew Premdas)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 12:05:28 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] what RSpec approach could I use for this.
In-Reply-To: <6154714fb3078c63792ba09e24c7190f@ruby-forum.com>
References: <6154714fb3078c63792ba09e24c7190f@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <CAMxjd8P0uU7Noht_DVSGPszPC8xAf=s+SJ7crqNEakFYYZpi3w@mail.gmail.com>

On 3 March 2012 21:55, Greg C. <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:

> Background:  So I have roughly:
>
> class A
>   def calculate_input_datetimes
>      # do stuff to calculate datetimes - then for each one identified
>      process_datetimes(my_datetime_start, my_datetime_end)
>   end
>
> My thoughts on this is that this method is fundamentally flawed as it is
working at two different levels of abstraction. The first is doing date
calculation using algorithms  and the second is delegating responsibility
by calling processing dates. Instead you should have a method that just
delegates e.g.

def foo
   calculate_datetimes
   process_datetimes
end

Now your test for foo is all about it calling calculate... and then calling
process... with the results. (I'll leave it up to you to determine how you
pass the results.

The actual methods you delegate too now can be tested independently.

Your current tests are actually telling you this, because they want to do
one thing and then another and that is making them harder to implement

HTH

Andrew


>   def process_datetimes(input_datetime_start, input_datetime_end)
>      # do stuff
>   end
> end
>
> So:
> * I want to test that calculate_input_datetimes algorithms are working
> and calculating the correct datetimes to pass to process_datetimes
> * I know I can STUB out process_datetimes so that it's code won't be
> involved in the test
>
> QUESTION:  How can I setup the rspec test however so I can specifically
> test that the correct datestimes were attempted to be passed over to
> process_datetimes,  So for a given spec test that process_datetimes was
> called three (3) times say with the following parameters passed:
>
> * 2012-03-03T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-09T23:59:59+00:00
> * 2012-03-10T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-16T23:59:59+00:00
> * 2012-03-17T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-23T23:59:59+00:00
>
>
> thanks
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>



-- 
------------------------
Andrew Premdas
blog.andrew.premdas.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120305/2bc15ff7/attachment.html>

From r.grosmann at gmail.com  Mon Mar  5 08:18:18 2012
From: r.grosmann at gmail.com (ruud144)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 00:18:18 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rspec-users] syntax for custom messages
Message-ID: <b85cd634-16fc-48bd-aeed-886bc4069099@r1g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>

hi group,

I read that expectations can print a custom message on failure using a
syntax like

cars.should be_empty, "Cars left"

But when I try this syntax for this expectation:

string.should == 'Cars left', 'Yippee, no cars anymore'

I get a syntax error:

syntax error, unexpected ',', expecting keyword_end (SyntaxError)

I want two things:
- I want a syntax error free expectation for should ==
- I want to understand what the mechanism is. I am afraid that my ruby
knowledge is not sufficient. Clearly, should is a function, but what
are be_empty and == then? Parameters? Can I use parentheses?

Thanks for helping me!

Ruud

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Mar  5 14:10:01 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 08:10:01 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] syntax for custom messages
In-Reply-To: <b85cd634-16fc-48bd-aeed-886bc4069099@r1g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
References: <b85cd634-16fc-48bd-aeed-886bc4069099@r1g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWTseG3-6RWdX7OA4BEu954Zyxwu8g7R88hNGxvFfOQjfg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:18 AM, ruud144 <r.grosmann at gmail.com> wrote:
> hi group,
>
> I read that expectations can print a custom message on failure using a
> syntax like
>
> cars.should be_empty, "Cars left"
>
> But when I try this syntax for this expectation:
>
> string.should == 'Cars left', 'Yippee, no cars anymore'
>
> I get a syntax error:
>
> syntax error, unexpected ',', expecting keyword_end (SyntaxError)
>
> I want two things:
> - I want a syntax error free expectation for should ==

Can't have it because Ruby won't parse it. The reason `a.should == b`
works is because Ruby parses that as `a.should.==(b)`.

There is an `eq` matcher, which is the recommended approach these days
for this (and other similar) reason(s):

string.should eq('Cars left'), 'Yippee, no cars anymore'

> - I want to understand what the mechanism is. I am afraid that my ruby
> knowledge is not sufficient. Clearly, should is a function, but what
> are be_empty and == then? Parameters? Can I use parentheses?

Here are the bits of code relevant to your question:

https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/blob/master/lib/rspec/expectations/extensions/kernel.rb#L11-13

https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/blob/master/lib/rspec/expectations/handler.rb#L4-7

The `should` method delegates to `handle_matcher`, passing along the
matcher (which might be nil), optional message (also might be nil),
and optional block (again, might be nil).

When you use `a.should == b`, the matcher itself is nil, and the
`handle_matcher` method delegates to a `PositiveOperatorMatcher`
(there is also a `NegativeOperatorMatcher` for `should_not`),
otherwise it handles the matcher itself.

Parens won't help you here because everything after `==` is bound to
`==`, not should - there's no way (that I know of) to bind the message
to `should`. It's feasible to pass an array to `==`:

  string.should == ['Cars left', 'Yippee, no cars anymore']

... but then we'd be comparing `string` with the list, so that
wouldn't work either (nor would it make any sense).

Your best bet is using the `eq` matcher, as described above.

HTH,
David

>
> Thanks for helping me!
>
> Ruud

From jko170 at gmail.com  Mon Mar  5 14:47:06 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 07:47:06 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] what RSpec approach could I use for this.
In-Reply-To: <CAMxjd8P0uU7Noht_DVSGPszPC8xAf=s+SJ7crqNEakFYYZpi3w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6154714fb3078c63792ba09e24c7190f@ruby-forum.com>
	<CAMxjd8P0uU7Noht_DVSGPszPC8xAf=s+SJ7crqNEakFYYZpi3w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F509159A-6ED5-45ED-A5AF-D235F76F4CDA@gmail.com>


On Mar 5, 2012, at 5:05 AM, Andrew Premdas wrote:

> 
> On 3 March 2012 21:55, Greg C. <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Background:  So I have roughly:
> 
> class A
>   def calculate_input_datetimes
>      # do stuff to calculate datetimes - then for each one identified
>      process_datetimes(my_datetime_start, my_datetime_end)
>   end
> 
> My thoughts on this is that this method is fundamentally flawed as it is working at two different levels of abstraction. The first is doing date calculation using algorithms  and the second is delegating responsibility by calling processing dates. Instead you should have a method that just delegates e.g.
> 
> def foo
>    calculate_datetimes
>    process_datetimes
> end
> 
> Now your test for foo is all about it calling calculate... and then calling process... with the results. (I'll leave it up to you to determine how you pass the results.
> 
> The actual methods you delegate too now can be tested independently.
> 
> Your current tests are actually telling you this, because they want to do one thing and then another and that is making them harder to implement

This. Your tests tell you so much about the implementation code. Hard to test? Bad design.

> 
> HTH
> 
> Andrew
>  
>   def process_datetimes(input_datetime_start, input_datetime_end)
>      # do stuff
>   end
> end
> 
> So:
> * I want to test that calculate_input_datetimes algorithms are working
> and calculating the correct datetimes to pass to process_datetimes
> * I know I can STUB out process_datetimes so that it's code won't be
> involved in the test
> 
> QUESTION:  How can I setup the rspec test however so I can specifically
> test that the correct datestimes were attempted to be passed over to
> process_datetimes,  So for a given spec test that process_datetimes was
> called three (3) times say with the following parameters passed:
> 
> * 2012-03-03T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-09T23:59:59+00:00
> * 2012-03-10T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-16T23:59:59+00:00
> * 2012-03-17T00:00:00+00:00, 2012-03-23T23:59:59+00:00
> 
> 
> thanks
> 
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------
> Andrew Premdas
> blog.andrew.premdas.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120305/2cfa4f40/attachment.html>

From jko170 at gmail.com  Mon Mar  5 15:13:57 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 08:13:57 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] syntax for custom messages
In-Reply-To: <b85cd634-16fc-48bd-aeed-886bc4069099@r1g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
References: <b85cd634-16fc-48bd-aeed-886bc4069099@r1g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <FC83E045-EF59-4B6E-B65A-844EEDD0FFF9@gmail.com>


On Mar 5, 2012, at 1:18 AM, ruud144 wrote:

> hi group,
> 
> I read that expectations can print a custom message on failure using a
> syntax like
> 
> cars.should be_empty, "Cars left"

This is because RSpec predicate matchers can accept a block:
https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/blob/master/spec/rspec/matchers/be_spec.rb#L174

> 
> But when I try this syntax for this expectation:
> 
> string.should == 'Cars left', 'Yippee, no cars anymore'

This will work:
string.should eq('Cars left'), 'Yippee, no cars anymore'

> 
> I get a syntax error:
> 
> syntax error, unexpected ',', expecting keyword_end (SyntaxError)
> 
> I want two things:
> - I want a syntax error free expectation for should ==
> - I want to understand what the mechanism is. I am afraid that my ruby
> knowledge is not sufficient. Clearly, should is a function, but what
> are be_empty and == then? Parameters? Can I use parentheses?
> 
> Thanks for helping me!
> 
> Ruud
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

Personally, I think custom messages should be deprecated. Nobody uses them and it's impossible to support them 100% of the time (as in predicate matchers). The default failure messages work 99% of the time, and if it doesn't, a custom matcher is the way to go.

David?


From r.grosmann at gmail.com  Mon Mar  5 16:28:19 2012
From: r.grosmann at gmail.com (ruud144)
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2012 08:28:19 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rspec-users] syntax for custom messages
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWTseG3-6RWdX7OA4BEu954Zyxwu8g7R88hNGxvFfOQjfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <b85cd634-16fc-48bd-aeed-886bc4069099@r1g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>
	<CAKw-oWTseG3-6RWdX7OA4BEu954Zyxwu8g7R88hNGxvFfOQjfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <36e4b8e9-74b3-4b4f-9de0-6a2d44e904ba@q12g2000vbt.googlegroups.com>

Thank you for your explanation!

Ruud

On Mar 5, 3:10?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 2:18 AM, ruud144 <r.grosm... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > hi group,
>
> > I read that expectations can print a custom message on failure using a
> > syntax like
>
> > cars.should be_empty, "Cars left"
>
> > But when I try this syntax for this expectation:
>
> > string.should == 'Cars left', 'Yippee, no cars anymore'
>
> > I get a syntax error:
>
> > syntax error, unexpected ',', expecting keyword_end (SyntaxError)
>
> > I want two things:
> > - I want a syntax error free expectation for should ==
>
> Can't have it because Ruby won't parse it. The reason `a.should == b`
> works is because Ruby parses that as `a.should.==(b)`.
>
> There is an `eq` matcher, which is the recommended approach these days
> for this (and other similar) reason(s):
>
> string.should eq('Cars left'), 'Yippee, no cars anymore'
>
> > - I want to understand what the mechanism is. I am afraid that my ruby
> > knowledge is not sufficient. Clearly, should is a function, but what
> > are be_empty and == then? Parameters? Can I use parentheses?
>
> Here are the bits of code relevant to your question:
>
> https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/blob/master/lib/rspec/exp...
>
> https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/blob/master/lib/rspec/exp...
>
> The `should` method delegates to `handle_matcher`, passing along the
> matcher (which might be nil), optional message (also might be nil),
> and optional block (again, might be nil).
>
> When you use `a.should == b`, the matcher itself is nil, and the
> `handle_matcher` method delegates to a `PositiveOperatorMatcher`
> (there is also a `NegativeOperatorMatcher` for `should_not`),
> otherwise it handles the matcher itself.
>
> Parens won't help you here because everything after `==` is bound to
> `==`, not should - there's no way (that I know of) to bind the message
> to `should`. It's feasible to pass an array to `==`:
>
> ? string.should == ['Cars left', 'Yippee, no cars anymore']
>
> ... but then we'd be comparing `string` with the list, so that
> wouldn't work either (nor would it make any sense).
>
> Your best bet is using the `eq` matcher, as described above.
>
> HTH,
> David
>
>
>
> > Thanks for helping me!
>
> > Ruud
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From matt at mattwynne.net  Wed Mar  7 07:22:39 2012
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 07:22:39 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
Message-ID: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>

Hi all,

I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:

    result = nil
    thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
    result.should == expected

This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:

   thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)

Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other people test yields?

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120307/0e99e217/attachment.html>

From mortenmoellerriis at gmail.com  Wed Mar  7 11:39:13 2012
From: mortenmoellerriis at gmail.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_M=F8ller_Riis?=)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:39:13 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>

How about this?

thing.do_stuff(&:to_s).should == expected


Best regards
Morten M?ller Riis



On Mar 7, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
> 
>     result = nil
>     thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>     result.should == expected
> 
> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
> 
>    thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
> 
> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other people test yields?
> 
> cheers,
> Matt
> 
> --
> Freelance programmer & coach
> Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
> Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
> Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120307/ddfb2f84/attachment.html>

From ken.chien at gmail.com  Wed Mar  7 15:12:43 2012
From: ken.chien at gmail.com (Ken Chien)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 10:12:43 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <CAJQ3tDjPYVpa0TvA+9Lg47+un2HrD9gVt7CJzRTjYzZ5T6DA=w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Matt,
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>
>     result = nil
>     thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>     result.should == expected
>
> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more
> this:
>
>    thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>
> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other
> people test yields?
>
>
I came across this about a month or two ago.
You can do this:
    thing.should_receive(:do_stuff).and_yield( whatever)

See http://rubydoc.info/gems/rspec-mocks/frames for more details.

Regards,
Ken
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120307/3b39dab9/attachment-0001.html>

From matt at mattwynne.net  Wed Mar  7 17:53:41 2012
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 17:53:41 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <CAJQ3tDjPYVpa0TvA+9Lg47+un2HrD9gVt7CJzRTjYzZ5T6DA=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<CAJQ3tDjPYVpa0TvA+9Lg47+un2HrD9gVt7CJzRTjYzZ5T6DA=w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0910DED8-28D9-4D18-BBB4-836730954C17@mattwynne.net>


On 7 Mar 2012, at 15:12, Ken Chien wrote:

> Hi Matt, 
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
> 
>     result = nil
>     thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>     result.should == expected
> 
> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
> 
>    thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
> 
> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other people test yields?
> 
> 
> I came across this about a month or two ago.  
> You can do this:
>     thing.should_receive(:do_stuff).and_yield( whatever)

Surely that sets up a mocked collaborator to respond by yielding something, doesn't it? That's not what I'm looking for. I want to specify that a method on the class I'm testing yields a certain value.

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120307/df1922ef/attachment.html>

From matt at mattwynne.net  Wed Mar  7 17:56:30 2012
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 17:56:30 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>


On 7 Mar 2012, at 11:39, Morten M?ller Riis wrote:

> On Mar 7, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>> 
>>     result = nil
>>     thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>>     result.should == expected
>> 
>> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
>> 
>>    thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>> 
>> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other people test yields?
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Matt

> How about this?
> 
> thing.do_stuff(&:to_s).should == expected

Yes, that's a neat hack, but I'd prefer to be able to assert on the actual yielded value, instead of the result of calling an arbitrary method on it.

Doesn't anyone else do this?

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120307/9b2fa1d5/attachment.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Mar  7 18:16:17 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:16:17 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWT1YBXpAiUHYYn2QHjM-2-2Q8Uapgx+UtZRgNWOyTMExw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>
> On 7 Mar 2012, at 11:39, Morten M?ller Riis wrote:
>
> On Mar 7, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>
> ? ? result = nil
> ? ? thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
> ? ? result.should == expected
>
> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
>
> ? ?thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>
> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other
> people test yields?
>
> cheers,
> Matt
>
>
> How about this?
>
> thing.do_stuff(&:to_s).should == expected
>
>
> Yes, that's a neat hack, but I'd prefer to be able to assert on the actual
> yielded value, instead of the result of calling an arbitrary method on it.

thing.do_stuff(&:self) would be a bit less arbitrary :)

>
> Doesn't anyone else do this?
>
> cheers,
> Matt
>
> --
> Freelance programmer &?coach
> Author,?http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
> Founder,?http://www.relishapp.com/
> Twitter,?https://twitter.com/mattwynne
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Wed Mar  7 18:26:40 2012
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 13:26:40 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <CA+e84E0Dog4r7O1p1cUMcccG7Jufkmnn0m_meEOxDR2QzLXXWA@mail.gmail.com>

Matt,

I have typically done what you are already doing, but I am also
interested in the answer you seek. Another idea might be something
like since #do-stuff would need to be invoked with a block:

   expect(thing, :do_stuff).to_yield val

Zach

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>
> On 7 Mar 2012, at 11:39, Morten M?ller Riis wrote:
>
> On Mar 7, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>
> ? ? result = nil
> ? ? thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
> ? ? result.should == expected
>
> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
>
> ? ?thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>
> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other
> people test yields?
>
> cheers,
> Matt
>
>
> How about this?
>
> thing.do_stuff(&:to_s).should == expected
>
>
> Yes, that's a neat hack, but I'd prefer to be able to assert on the actual
> yielded value, instead of the result of calling an arbitrary method on it.
>
> Doesn't anyone else do this?
>
> cheers,
> Matt
>
> --
> Freelance programmer &?coach
> Author,?http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
> Founder,?http://www.relishapp.com/
> Twitter,?https://twitter.com/mattwynne
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users



-- 

--
@zachdennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Mar  7 18:28:37 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 12:28:37 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <0910DED8-28D9-4D18-BBB4-836730954C17@mattwynne.net>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<CAJQ3tDjPYVpa0TvA+9Lg47+un2HrD9gVt7CJzRTjYzZ5T6DA=w@mail.gmail.com>
	<0910DED8-28D9-4D18-BBB4-836730954C17@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWShM0Zv9YYHPQS4YdVzqM899dSrCAUdx0+yY8mNp40N4g@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>
> On 7 Mar 2012, at 15:12, Ken Chien wrote:
>
> Hi Matt,
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>>
>> ? ? result = nil
>> ? ? thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>> ? ? result.should == expected
>>
>> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more
>> this:
>>
>> ? ?thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>>
>> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other
>> people test yields?
>>
>
> I came across this about a month or two ago.
> You can do this:
> ??? thing.should_receive(:do_stuff).and_yield( whatever)
>
>
> Surely that sets up a mocked collaborator to respond by yielding something, doesn't it?

Right.

> That's not what I'm looking for.

Right again.

> I want to specify that a method on the class I'm testing yields a certain value.
>
> cheers,
> Matt
>
> --
> Freelance programmer &?coach
> Author,?http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
> Founder,?http://www.relishapp.com/
> Twitter,?https://twitter.com/mattwynne
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From matt at mattwynne.net  Wed Mar  7 20:30:23 2012
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 20:30:23 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <CA+e84E0Dog4r7O1p1cUMcccG7Jufkmnn0m_meEOxDR2QzLXXWA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
	<CA+e84E0Dog4r7O1p1cUMcccG7Jufkmnn0m_meEOxDR2QzLXXWA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F8ABEBF4-2D6C-4BD9-9A9C-D28778CC003D@mattwynne.net>


On 7 Mar 2012, at 18:26, Zach Dennis wrote:

> Matt,
> 
> I have typically done what you are already doing, but I am also
> interested in the answer you seek. Another idea might be something
> like since #do-stuff would need to be invoked with a block:
> 
>   expect(thing, :do_stuff).to_yield val

Yeah, I like that.

Is that real yet or is this just an idea?

> 
> Zach
> 
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>> 
>> On 7 Mar 2012, at 11:39, Morten M?ller Riis wrote:
>> 
>> On Mar 7, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>> 
>>     result = nil
>>     thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>>     result.should == expected
>> 
>> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
>> 
>>    thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>> 
>> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other
>> people test yields?
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Matt
>> 
>> 
>> How about this?
>> 
>> thing.do_stuff(&:to_s).should == expected
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, that's a neat hack, but I'd prefer to be able to assert on the actual
>> yielded value, instead of the result of calling an arbitrary method on it.
>> 
>> Doesn't anyone else do this?
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Matt
>> 
>> --
>> Freelance programmer & coach
>> Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
>> Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
>> Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> --
> @zachdennis
> http://www.continuousthinking.com
> http://www.mutuallyhuman.com
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120307/22d0cbc2/attachment.html>

From matt at mattwynne.net  Wed Mar  7 20:32:19 2012
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 20:32:19 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWT1YBXpAiUHYYn2QHjM-2-2Q8Uapgx+UtZRgNWOyTMExw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWT1YBXpAiUHYYn2QHjM-2-2Q8Uapgx+UtZRgNWOyTMExw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C1ACF295-5EED-4E3C-913D-117C6A26EA7D@mattwynne.net>


On 7 Mar 2012, at 18:16, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>> 
>> On 7 Mar 2012, at 11:39, Morten M?ller Riis wrote:
>> 
>> On Mar 7, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>> 
>>     result = nil
>>     thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>>     result.should == expected
>> 
>> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
>> 
>>    thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>> 
>> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other
>> people test yields?
>> 
>> cheers,
>> Matt
>> 
>> 
>> How about this?
>> 
>> thing.do_stuff(&:to_s).should == expected
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, that's a neat hack, but I'd prefer to be able to assert on the actual
>> yielded value, instead of the result of calling an arbitrary method on it.
> 
> thing.do_stuff(&:self) would be a bit less arbitrary :)

It would, but does it work?

I assumed it would too but here on my Ruby 1.9.2 it gives me a NoMethodError :(

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120307/6014823e/attachment-0001.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Mar  7 20:42:01 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 14:42:01 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <C1ACF295-5EED-4E3C-913D-117C6A26EA7D@mattwynne.net>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWT1YBXpAiUHYYn2QHjM-2-2Q8Uapgx+UtZRgNWOyTMExw@mail.gmail.com>
	<C1ACF295-5EED-4E3C-913D-117C6A26EA7D@mattwynne.net>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWQANE32f7w8H_oOuAsePF7ir3t6mSi0VMCkOoDRHvtA8g@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>
> On 7 Mar 2012, at 18:16, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 7 Mar 2012, at 11:39, Morten M?ller Riis wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 7, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>
>
> ? ? result = nil
>
> ? ? thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>
> ? ? result.should == expected
>
>
> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
>
>
> ? ?thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>
>
> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other
>
> people test yields?
>
>
> cheers,
>
> Matt
>
>
>
> How about this?
>
>
> thing.do_stuff(&:to_s).should == expected
>
>
>
> Yes, that's a neat hack, but I'd prefer to be able to assert on the actual
>
> yielded value, instead of the result of calling an arbitrary method on it.
>
>
> thing.do_stuff(&:self) would be a bit less arbitrary :)
>
>
> It would, but does it work?
>
> I assumed it would too but here on my Ruby 1.9.2 it gives me a?NoMethodError :(

I had assumed as well, and you know what they say about ASSuming!

From jko170 at gmail.com  Thu Mar  8 05:59:46 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2012 22:59:46 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] color option
In-Reply-To: <4CC55BC30D9D44F581A56BFCC6A00ECB@gmail.com>
References: <4CC55BC30D9D44F581A56BFCC6A00ECB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6A5BA505-B91D-409B-8C60-CE0E4799A085@gmail.com>


On Feb 27, 2012, at 10:58 AM, jed schneider wrote:

> we are on rspec 2.6.4 and for awhile my color flag seems to be ignored  when running specs in my .rspec file but my formatting option is picking up. Did the --color flag get changed? 
> 
> my .rspec file
> --color
> -f d
> 
> thanks!
> 
> -- 
> jed schneider
> Sent with Sparrow
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

Works for me on 2.8.

Do you maybe have this in your RSpec.configuration:

RSpec.configure do |config|
  config.color = false
end

?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120307/29f51008/attachment.html>

From mortenmoellerriis at gmail.com  Thu Mar  8 11:57:05 2012
From: mortenmoellerriis at gmail.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_M=F8ller_Riis?=)
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 12:57:05 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWQANE32f7w8H_oOuAsePF7ir3t6mSi0VMCkOoDRHvtA8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWT1YBXpAiUHYYn2QHjM-2-2Q8Uapgx+UtZRgNWOyTMExw@mail.gmail.com>
	<C1ACF295-5EED-4E3C-913D-117C6A26EA7D@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWQANE32f7w8H_oOuAsePF7ir3t6mSi0VMCkOoDRHvtA8g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <887CD80B-70C3-4BF6-801E-B890F911D777@gmail.com>

&:self won't work because self isn't an instance method on the object, eg. some_object.self won't work either.

If you wan't something cleaner couldn't you use this method in spec_helper.rb ?

def block_yield(object, method)
  object.send(method) { yield if block_given? }
end

Then:

block_yield(thing, :do_stuff).should == "value"



Mvh
Morten M?ller Riis



On Mar 7, 2012, at 9:42 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>> 
>> On 7 Mar 2012, at 18:16, David Chelimsky wrote:
>> 
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:56 AM, Matt Wynne <matt at mattwynne.net> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On 7 Mar 2012, at 11:39, Morten M?ller Riis wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Mar 7, 2012, at 8:22 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> 
>> I'm spec'ing a method that yields a value. Right now, I spec it like this:
>> 
>> 
>>     result = nil
>> 
>>     thing.do_stuff { |value| result = value }
>> 
>>     result.should == expected
>> 
>> 
>> This feels like too much ceremony. What I want to do is something more this:
>> 
>> 
>>    thing.do_stuff.should yield_value(expected)
>> 
>> 
>> Is there anything built into RSpec to let me do this? If not, how do other
>> 
>> people test yields?
>> 
>> 
>> cheers,
>> 
>> Matt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> How about this?
>> 
>> 
>> thing.do_stuff(&:to_s).should == expected
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, that's a neat hack, but I'd prefer to be able to assert on the actual
>> 
>> yielded value, instead of the result of calling an arbitrary method on it.
>> 
>> 
>> thing.do_stuff(&:self) would be a bit less arbitrary :)
>> 
>> 
>> It would, but does it work?
>> 
>> I assumed it would too but here on my Ruby 1.9.2 it gives me a NoMethodError :(
> 
> I had assumed as well, and you know what they say about ASSuming!
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Thu Mar  8 23:15:00 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 18:15:00 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] how to refactor signin process for re-use?
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuPSz4u5VYcmJVQM338vEpfghevT4eEXpPfG1RnTKvn-9A@mail.gmail.com>

In my authenticate_pages.spec (requests) I do the following to test if the
signin worked:

 describe "with valid information" do
      #let(:account) { FactoryGirl.create(:account) }
      let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }

      before do
        fill_in "Email", with: user.email
        fill_in "Password", with: user.password
        click_button "Sign in"
      end

      it { should have_link('Sign out', href: signout_path) }
      it { should_not have_link('Sign in', href: signin_path) }
    end


Now in my other controllers that assume the user is signed in, how can I
refactor this and put it somewhere that I can just call to make the user
signed in so I can test pages that assume the user is already signed in?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120308/273b16f7/attachment.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Mar  9 03:38:31 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 21:38:31 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] how to refactor signin process for re-use?
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuPSz4u5VYcmJVQM338vEpfghevT4eEXpPfG1RnTKvn-9A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuPSz4u5VYcmJVQM338vEpfghevT4eEXpPfG1RnTKvn-9A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWQm8nABJXGiXEV0a7zBKXOZ=wdcTbb-toSjrTGDA==JRw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 5:15 PM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
> In my authenticate_pages.spec (requests) I do the following to test if the
> signin worked:
>
> ?describe "with valid information" do
> ? ? ? #let(:account) { FactoryGirl.create(:account) }
> ? ? ? let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>
> ? ? ? before do
> ? ? ? ? fill_in "Email", with: user.email
> ? ? ? ? fill_in "Password", with: user.password
> ? ? ? ? click_button "Sign in"
> ? ? ? end
>
> ? ? ? it { should have_link('Sign out', href: signout_path) }
> ? ? ? it { should_not have_link('Sign in', href: signin_path) }
> ? ? end
>
>
> Now in my other controllers that assume the user is signed in, how can I
> refactor this and put it somewhere that I can just call to make the user
> signed in so I can test pages that assume the user is already signed in?

Here's one pattern I've seen (and used):

def login_as(user)
  fill_in "Email", with: user.email
  fill_in "Password", with: user.password
  click_button "Sign in"
end

describe "things" do
  before { sign_in_as(FactoryGirl.create:(user) }
  describe "GET /thing" do
    # ...
  end
end

HTH,
David

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Fri Mar  9 13:06:16 2012
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (U. M.)
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:06:16 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Sufficiently tested?
Message-ID: <e67505078fa1d60e6fc97c1805eb48e7@ruby-forum.com>

Hi everybody,

I have a general question about how many different cases have to be
covered in one Example.

Considering the famous Fizzbuzz program, you should test if your output
is either "Fizz", "buzz", "Fizzbuzz" or just the number (between 1 and
100). Pretty simple. However, I often see solutions of testing multiples
of 3 only by looking at some relevant values like 6, 9 etc.

it "should return 'fizz' when number is divisible by 3" do
    @fizzbuzz.calculate(3).should == 'fizz'
    @fizzbuzz.calculate(6).should == 'fizz'
    @fizzbuzz.calculate(9).should == 'fizz'
end

So far, so good. But what if I claim that the test will fail in case of
12? It's actually not covered and we are just assuming, that all further
multiples will work as well, because these do. My idea was to check all
multiples right away in a loop.

it "should return Fizz if number is divisible only by 3" do
  (1..100).each do |number|
    @fizzbuzz.calculate(number).should == "Fizz" if number % 3 == 0 &&
    number % 5 != 0
  end
end

Given that the calculate method works fine, both ways will pass. But my
question is: Does my solution more than it actually needs to or is the
first one in fact a little too lazy?

Thanks for your thoughts.
Ulfmann

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Mar  9 14:15:59 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 08:15:59 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Sufficiently tested?
In-Reply-To: <e67505078fa1d60e6fc97c1805eb48e7@ruby-forum.com>
References: <e67505078fa1d60e6fc97c1805eb48e7@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWTCNafCfGxSq7q2yv7C-GydcyWZ2fRXVnh_2Gmg3SY4Mg@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 7:06 AM, U. M. <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I have a general question about how many different cases have to be
> covered in one Example.
>
> Considering the famous Fizzbuzz program, you should test if your output
> is either "Fizz", "buzz", "Fizzbuzz" or just the number (between 1 and
> 100). Pretty simple. However, I often see solutions of testing multiples
> of 3 only by looking at some relevant values like 6, 9 etc.
>
> it "should return 'fizz' when number is divisible by 3" do
> ? ?@fizzbuzz.calculate(3).should == 'fizz'
> ? ?@fizzbuzz.calculate(6).should == 'fizz'
> ? ?@fizzbuzz.calculate(9).should == 'fizz'
> end
>
> So far, so good. But what if I claim that the test will fail in case of
> 12? It's actually not covered and we are just assuming, that all further
> multiples will work as well, because these do. My idea was to check all
> multiples right away in a loop.
>
> it "should return Fizz if number is divisible only by 3" do
> ?(1..100).each do |number|
> ? ?@fizzbuzz.calculate(number).should == "Fizz" if number % 3 == 0 &&
> ? ?number % 5 != 0
> ?end
> end
>
> Given that the calculate method works fine, both ways will pass. But my
> question is: Does my solution more than it actually needs to or is the
> first one in fact a little too lazy?
>
> Thanks for your thoughts.
> Ulfmann

TDD (and testing, in general) is, at its core, a risk-reduction
technique. Because every example is code that you have to maintain,
there is a tradeoff between completeness and maintainability. The
first example is very simple and easy to understand at first glance.
The second example is less so, which increases the long term cost of
maintainability, thereby increasing risk (by increasing cost).

Additionally, TDD is a gray-box sport: it's not white-box because
you're operating at the surface of the object under test; it's not
black-box because you can see the implementation! For me, the
questions are:

* given the relative complexity of the problem and the implementation,
do the examples provide me sufficient confidence that:
  * the implementation is sound?
  * the examples are likely to catch regressions?

As soon as the answer to both of those questions is "yes", I move on.

There is, of course, a ton of context that needs to be considered. Are
you working on a team of developers that you trust to not to
ridiculous shit? If so, then you don't need to protect against idiocy.
If not, you might need more examples (and you might consider finding a
new job).

HTH,
David

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Fri Mar  9 14:27:03 2012
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:27:03 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] how to refactor signin process for re-use?
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWQm8nABJXGiXEV0a7zBKXOZ=wdcTbb-toSjrTGDA==JRw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuPSz4u5VYcmJVQM338vEpfghevT4eEXpPfG1RnTKvn-9A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKw-oWQm8nABJXGiXEV0a7zBKXOZ=wdcTbb-toSjrTGDA==JRw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+e84E1RFrUpVU0kfKiM-N99z3dQy8--5dFCOHpuWXzDhfVNUQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 10:38 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 5:15 PM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> In my authenticate_pages.spec (requests) I do the following to test if the
>> signin worked:
>>
>> ?describe "with valid information" do
>> ? ? ? #let(:account) { FactoryGirl.create(:account) }
>> ? ? ? let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>>
>> ? ? ? before do
>> ? ? ? ? fill_in "Email", with: user.email
>> ? ? ? ? fill_in "Password", with: user.password
>> ? ? ? ? click_button "Sign in"
>> ? ? ? end
>>
>> ? ? ? it { should have_link('Sign out', href: signout_path) }
>> ? ? ? it { should_not have_link('Sign in', href: signin_path) }
>> ? ? end
>>
>>
>> Now in my other controllers that assume the user is signed in, how can I
>> refactor this and put it somewhere that I can just call to make the user
>> signed in so I can test pages that assume the user is already signed in?
>
> Here's one pattern I've seen (and used):
>
> def login_as(user)
> ?fill_in "Email", with: user.email
> ?fill_in "Password", with: user.password
> ?click_button "Sign in"
> end
>
> describe "things" do
> ?before { sign_in_as(FactoryGirl.create:(user) }
> ?describe "GET /thing" do
> ? ?# ...
> ?end
> end

Where #sign_in_as and #login_as in David's example should be the same method.

Zach

>
> HTH,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users



-- 

--
@zachdennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com

From samwgoldman at gmail.com  Fri Mar  9 15:24:42 2012
From: samwgoldman at gmail.com (Sam Goldman)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 10:24:42 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] how to refactor signin process for re-use?
In-Reply-To: <CAG2rwuPSz4u5VYcmJVQM338vEpfghevT4eEXpPfG1RnTKvn-9A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuPSz4u5VYcmJVQM338vEpfghevT4eEXpPfG1RnTKvn-9A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJ30t1JjyS1k7_rA9JUdBxcYvdT1wpb_0oDvb2M=wM9C6D_HHw@mail.gmail.com>

We have used shared contexts to achieve this.
https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/docs/example-groups/shared-context

For controller specs using devise, assuming we have let(:current_user)
in the test including this shared context:

shared_context :signed_in do
  before do
    sign_in(current_user)
    controller.stub!(:current_user).and_return(current_user)
  end
end

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 6:15 PM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
> In my authenticate_pages.spec (requests) I do the following to test if the
> signin worked:
>
> ?describe "with valid information" do
> ? ? ? #let(:account) { FactoryGirl.create(:account) }
> ? ? ? let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>
> ? ? ? before do
> ? ? ? ? fill_in "Email", with: user.email
> ? ? ? ? fill_in "Password", with: user.password
> ? ? ? ? click_button "Sign in"
> ? ? ? end
>
> ? ? ? it { should have_link('Sign out', href: signout_path) }
> ? ? ? it { should_not have_link('Sign in', href: signin_path) }
> ? ? end
>
>
> Now in my other controllers that assume the user is signed in, how can I
> refactor this and put it somewhere that I can just call to make the user
> signed in so I can test pages that assume the user is already signed in?
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Fri Mar  9 14:59:02 2012
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 09:59:02 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Sufficiently tested?
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWTCNafCfGxSq7q2yv7C-GydcyWZ2fRXVnh_2Gmg3SY4Mg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e67505078fa1d60e6fc97c1805eb48e7@ruby-forum.com>
	<CAKw-oWTCNafCfGxSq7q2yv7C-GydcyWZ2fRXVnh_2Gmg3SY4Mg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+e84E1S_ciFgq2LOzwg3s6Oh0O=Pa23DwwoCkrygikMEtzLxw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 8:06 AM, U. M. <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> Hi everybody,

Hello!

>
> I have a general question about how many different cases have to be
> covered in one Example.
>
> Considering the famous Fizzbuzz program, you should test if your output
> is either "Fizz", "buzz", "Fizzbuzz" or just the number (between 1 and
> 100). Pretty simple. However, I often see solutions of testing multiples
> of 3 only by looking at some relevant values like 6, 9 etc.
>
> it "should return 'fizz' when number is divisible by 3" do
> ? ?@fizzbuzz.calculate(3).should == 'fizz'
> ? ?@fizzbuzz.calculate(6).should == 'fizz'
> ? ?@fizzbuzz.calculate(9).should == 'fizz'
> end
>
> So far, so good. But what if I claim that the test will fail in case of
> 12?

Then add an example for this and make that change. I might update the
spec to look like this:

  describe "#calculate" do
    it "returns 'fizz' when number is divisible by 3"

    context "(exceptions to the divisible by 3 rule)" do
      it "returns nil when number is 12"
    end
  end


> It's actually not covered and we are just assuming, that all further
> multiples will work as well, because these do. My idea was to check all
> multiples right away in a loop.
>
> it "should return Fizz if number is divisible only by 3" do
> ?(1..100).each do |number|
> ? ?@fizzbuzz.calculate(number).should == "Fizz" if number % 3 == 0 &&
> ? ?number % 5 != 0
> ?end
> end

This is more complicated then it needs to be and suffers the same
problem that you are trying to avoid. Here you are testing a larger
data set, but numbers are infinite... so while 100 numbers is more
than 3, it's still a far cry from covering a large amount of the
available set of numbers (which is infinite).

Similar to David, I try to write examples that show the implementation
working, but  once I am confident that the examples I have are proving
that implementation is working then I move on.

>
> Given that the calculate method works fine, both ways will pass. But my
> question is: Does my solution more than it actually needs to or is the
> first one in fact a little too lazy?

What do you think?

Zach

From myron.marston at gmail.com  Fri Mar  9 15:39:35 2012
From: myron.marston at gmail.com (Myron Marston)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 07:39:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [rspec-users] Blog post on building an around(:all) hook using
	fibers
Message-ID: <27536277.557.1331307575129.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbcgf10>

RSpec provides an around(:each) hook but no around(:all) hook.  I realized 
recently that you can build an around hook out of separate before/after 
hooks using fibers, and decided to blog about it [1], using an around(:all) 
hook as the example.  Some of you may find it interesting or even 
potentially useful.  There's a microgem available as a gist [2] as well.  
Note that I'll probably never use this gem and the :all hooks may be going 
away at some point [3], so use at your own risk.  It's more of a 
proof-of-concept and a fun exercise than anything else.

Myron

[1] 
http://myronmars.to/n/dev-blog/2012/03/building-an-around-hook-using-fibers
[2] https://gist.github.com/2005175
[3] https://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/issues/573
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120309/03dcb1ce/attachment.html>

From sahmed1020 at gmail.com  Sat Mar 10 02:38:01 2012
From: sahmed1020 at gmail.com (S Ahmed)
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2012 21:38:01 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] how to refactor signin process for re-use?
In-Reply-To: <CAJ30t1JjyS1k7_rA9JUdBxcYvdT1wpb_0oDvb2M=wM9C6D_HHw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAG2rwuPSz4u5VYcmJVQM338vEpfghevT4eEXpPfG1RnTKvn-9A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJ30t1JjyS1k7_rA9JUdBxcYvdT1wpb_0oDvb2M=wM9C6D_HHw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAG2rwuPfRUqmmK3qdOyRrE=UEjUKy+SNqATE-3oUsbwEOkMwfg@mail.gmail.com>

Could I somehow add the method to rspec so its available everywhere?

What would the class be so inside the describe block my method will be
available w/o having to include it?

I've seen some people open up the class and add methods to it ....

class Test::Unit::TestCase


On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Sam Goldman <samwgoldman at gmail.com> wrote:

> We have used shared contexts to achieve this.
>
> https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/docs/example-groups/shared-context
>
> For controller specs using devise, assuming we have let(:current_user)
> in the test including this shared context:
>
> shared_context :signed_in do
>  before do
>    sign_in(current_user)
>    controller.stub!(:current_user).and_return(current_user)
>  end
> end
>
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 6:15 PM, S Ahmed <sahmed1020 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > In my authenticate_pages.spec (requests) I do the following to test if
> the
> > signin worked:
> >
> >  describe "with valid information" do
> >       #let(:account) { FactoryGirl.create(:account) }
> >       let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
> >
> >       before do
> >         fill_in "Email", with: user.email
> >         fill_in "Password", with: user.password
> >         click_button "Sign in"
> >       end
> >
> >       it { should have_link('Sign out', href: signout_path) }
> >       it { should_not have_link('Sign in', href: signin_path) }
> >     end
> >
> >
> > Now in my other controllers that assume the user is signed in, how can I
> > refactor this and put it somewhere that I can just call to make the user
> > signed in so I can test pages that assume the user is already signed in?
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120309/8159a1e4/attachment.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Mar 12 02:10:56 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2012 21:10:56 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-2.9.0.rc1 is released!
Message-ID: <A7D7F6B2-20A8-4A2A-AD7B-147D25C494B3@gmail.com>

rspec-2.9.0.rc1 has been released, with numerous enhancements and bug fixes:

### rspec-core-2.9.0.rc1 / 2012-03-11
[full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0.rc1)

Enhancements

* Support for "X minutes X seconds" spec run duration in formatter. (uzzz)
* Strip whitespace from group and example names in doc formatter.
* Removed spork-0.9 shim. If you're using spork-0.8.x, you'll need to upgrade
  to 0.9.0.

Bug fixes

* Restore `--full_backtrace` option
* Ensure that values passed to `config.filter_run` are respected when running
  over DRb (using spork).
* Ensure shared example groups are reset after a run (as example groups are).
* Remove `rescue false` from calls to filters represented as Procs
* Ensure described_class gets the closest constant (pyromaniac)
* In "autorun", don't run the specs in the at_exit hook if there was an
  exception (most likely due to a SyntaxError). (sunaku)
* Don't extend groups with modules already used to extend ancestor groups.


### rspec-expectations-2.9.0.rc1 / 2012-03-11
[full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0.rc1)

Enhancements

* Move built-in matcher classes to RSpec::Matchers::BuiltIn to reduce pollution
  of RSpec::Matchers (which is included in every example).
* Autoload files with matcher classes to improve load time.

Bug fixes

* Align respond_to? and method_missing in DSL-defined matchers.
* Clear out user-defined instance variables between invocations of DSL-defined
  matchers.
* Dup the instance of a DSL generated matcher so its state is not changed by
  subsequent invocations.
* Treat expected args consistently across positive and negative expectations
  (thanks to Ralf Kistner for the heads up)


### rspec-mocks-2.9.0.rc1 / 2012-03-11
[full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0.rc1)

Enhancements

* Support order constraints across objects (preethiramdev)

Bug fixes

* Allow a `as_null_object` to be passed to `with`
* Pass proc to block passed to stub (Aubrey Rhodes)
* Initialize child message expectation args to match any args (#109 -
  preethiramdev)


### rspec-rails-2.9.0.rc1 / 2012-03-11
[full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/compare/v2.8.1...v2.9.0.rc1)

Enhancments

* add description method to RouteToMatcher (John Wulff)
* Run "db:test:clone_structure" instead of "db:test:prepare" if Active Record's
  schema format is ":sql". (Andrey Voronkov)

Bug fixes

* mock_model(XXX).as_null_object.unknown_method returns self again
* Generated view specs use different IDs for each attribute.


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Mon Mar 12 13:21:42 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 08:21:42 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-2.9.0.rc1 is released!
In-Reply-To: <A7D7F6B2-20A8-4A2A-AD7B-147D25C494B3@gmail.com>
References: <A7D7F6B2-20A8-4A2A-AD7B-147D25C494B3@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWRHWSsL__55RfBUqC_0JcPRzg7Lwzg77OZVXKOy7rSGPA@mail.gmail.com>

There was an error in one of the gemspecs so I just released
2.9.0.rc2. No other changes since rc1.

Cheers,
David

On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 9:10 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> rspec-2.9.0.rc1 has been released, with numerous enhancements and bug fixes:
>
> ### rspec-core-2.9.0.rc1 / 2012-03-11
> [full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0.rc1)
>
> Enhancements
>
> * Support for "X minutes X seconds" spec run duration in formatter. (uzzz)
> * Strip whitespace from group and example names in doc formatter.
> * Removed spork-0.9 shim. If you're using spork-0.8.x, you'll need to upgrade
> ?to 0.9.0.
>
> Bug fixes
>
> * Restore `--full_backtrace` option
> * Ensure that values passed to `config.filter_run` are respected when running
> ?over DRb (using spork).
> * Ensure shared example groups are reset after a run (as example groups are).
> * Remove `rescue false` from calls to filters represented as Procs
> * Ensure described_class gets the closest constant (pyromaniac)
> * In "autorun", don't run the specs in the at_exit hook if there was an
> ?exception (most likely due to a SyntaxError). (sunaku)
> * Don't extend groups with modules already used to extend ancestor groups.
>
>
> ### rspec-expectations-2.9.0.rc1 / 2012-03-11
> [full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0.rc1)
>
> Enhancements
>
> * Move built-in matcher classes to RSpec::Matchers::BuiltIn to reduce pollution
> ?of RSpec::Matchers (which is included in every example).
> * Autoload files with matcher classes to improve load time.
>
> Bug fixes
>
> * Align respond_to? and method_missing in DSL-defined matchers.
> * Clear out user-defined instance variables between invocations of DSL-defined
> ?matchers.
> * Dup the instance of a DSL generated matcher so its state is not changed by
> ?subsequent invocations.
> * Treat expected args consistently across positive and negative expectations
> ?(thanks to Ralf Kistner for the heads up)
>
>
> ### rspec-mocks-2.9.0.rc1 / 2012-03-11
> [full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0.rc1)
>
> Enhancements
>
> * Support order constraints across objects (preethiramdev)
>
> Bug fixes
>
> * Allow a `as_null_object` to be passed to `with`
> * Pass proc to block passed to stub (Aubrey Rhodes)
> * Initialize child message expectation args to match any args (#109 -
> ?preethiramdev)
>
>
> ### rspec-rails-2.9.0.rc1 / 2012-03-11
> [full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/compare/v2.8.1...v2.9.0.rc1)
>
> Enhancments
>
> * add description method to RouteToMatcher (John Wulff)
> * Run "db:test:clone_structure" instead of "db:test:prepare" if Active Record's
> ?schema format is ":sql". (Andrey Voronkov)
>
> Bug fixes
>
> * mock_model(XXX).as_null_object.unknown_method returns self again
> * Generated view specs use different IDs for each attribute.
>

From husseini.mel at gmail.com  Tue Mar 13 23:55:35 2012
From: husseini.mel at gmail.com (Mohamad El-Husseini)
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:55:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Can some one please explain why one of those two
	examples fails?
Message-ID: <4496136.618.1331682935545.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbga3>

The following are what I believe two ways of doing the same thing. Only the 
first example fails, while the latter passes. I'm finding it hard to get to 
understand describe and context blocks, particularly with respect to 
scopes. I would appreciate any "for dummies" explanation, or a link to a 
blog post that can clear this up for me. I'm still new to Rails and Ruby.

  describe "send password reset" do
    let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }

    # This fails
    context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
      let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
      before do
        user.send_password_reset
        last_token = user.password_reset_token
        user.send_password_reset
      end
      its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == last_token }
    end

    # This passes
    it "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
      user.send_password_reset
      last_token = user.password_reset_token
      user.send_password_reset
      user.password_reset_token.should_not == last_token
    end
  end

The first example fails with this:

Failure/Error: its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == last_token }
     NameError:
       undefined local variable or method `last_token' for 
#<RSpec::Core::ExampleGroup::Nested_6::Nested_7::Nested_1::Nested_1:0x0000000561e130>

Earlier, it out puts this:

 should not When you call a matcher in an example without a String, like 
this:

specify { object.should matcher }

or this:

it { should matcher }

RSpec expects the matcher to have a #description method. You should either
add a String to the example this matcher is being used in, or give it a
description method. Then you won't have to suffer this lengthy warning 
again.
 (FAILED - 1)


Another thing I noticed is that I can not use capybara inside of describe 
blocks unless the calls are in a before block... but I don't understand why.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120313/8c2f3cbe/attachment.html>

From mmazur at gmail.com  Wed Mar 14 00:24:03 2012
From: mmazur at gmail.com (Mike Mazur)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:24:03 +0800
Subject: [rspec-users] Can some one please explain why one of those two
 examples fails?
In-Reply-To: <4496136.618.1331682935545.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbga3>
References: <4496136.618.1331682935545.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbga3>
Message-ID: <CADYkP0k8P9=mE-Ae-np77e1KY9SEMWSsbwMBgiVTq9fJUUwFvg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 07:55, Mohamad El-Husseini
<husseini.mel at gmail.com> wrote:
> The following are what I believe two ways of doing the same thing. Only the
> first example fails, while the latter passes.

In your failing example:

   context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
      let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
      before do
        user.send_password_reset
        last_token = user.password_reset_token
        user.send_password_reset
      end
      its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == last_token }
    end

The `last_token` variable is in scope in the before block, but not in
the its block. You can fix this by changing it to an instance
variable:

   context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
      let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
      before do
        user.send_password_reset
        @last_token = user.password_reset_token
        user.send_password_reset
      end
      its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == @last_token }
    end

Another gotcha is: what is the its expression making assertions on?
The its method requires a subject to be defined.

RSpec defines an implicit subject based on the described class. I
imagine at the top of your .spec file you have something like:

  describe User do
    # stuff
  end

RSpec will generate a subject by calling `User.new`.
`password_reset_token` is then called on this new user instance in the
its block. You most certainly wanted to call `password_reset_token` on
the user object defined by the `let` statement.

So I think this should do the trick:

   context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
      let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
      subject { user }
      before do
        user.send_password_reset
        @last_token = user.password_reset_token
        user.send_password_reset
      end
      its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == @last_token }
    end

You can read more about RSpec's subject here:

  https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/docs/subject

Hope that helps,
Mike

From srshti at gmail.com  Wed Mar 14 07:15:13 2012
From: srshti at gmail.com (Srushti Ambekallu)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:45:13 +0530
Subject: [rspec-users] RSpec & JRuby
Message-ID: <C90D4219-03A6-4335-B29F-84168BA728D1@gmail.com>

We're working on a project with a bunch of padrino services running on JRuby 1.6.5. Currently, the tests are written Test::Unit, but we want to move to writing specs. We tried rspec but that seemed to fail, until we looked closer and found that JRuby 1.6.6 has fixed whatever the issue was.

We are in the process of upgrading to JRuby 1.6.6, which might mean that we can migrate to RSpec. But, I was warned that RSpec has had a number of issues with JRuby in the past and there's no reason not to expect them in the future, and that I should look at MiniTest's specs instead. Do you guys have any issues using RSpec with JRuby? Any advice on the matter would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Srushti
http://rubymonk.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120314/4684654c/attachment.html>

From jko170 at gmail.com  Wed Mar 14 08:22:25 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 02:22:25 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] RSpec & JRuby
In-Reply-To: <C90D4219-03A6-4335-B29F-84168BA728D1@gmail.com>
References: <C90D4219-03A6-4335-B29F-84168BA728D1@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F6E77A40-63E5-425D-B0C3-467433C0D2A8@gmail.com>


On Mar 14, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Srushti Ambekallu wrote:

> We're working on a project with a bunch of padrino services running on JRuby 1.6.5. Currently, the tests are written Test::Unit, but we want to move to writing specs. We tried rspec but that seemed to fail, until we looked closer and found that JRuby 1.6.6 has fixed whatever the issue was.
> 
> We are in the process of upgrading to JRuby 1.6.6, which might mean that we can migrate to RSpec. But, I was warned that RSpec has had a number of issues with JRuby in the past and there's no reason not to expect them in the future, and that I should look at MiniTest's specs instead. Do you guys have any issues using RSpec with JRuby? Any advice on the matter would be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> Srushti
> http://rubymonk.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

Not sure if this helps, but all RSpec libs (with the exception of rspec-mocks) are passing JRuby 1.6.7 on Travis.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120314/7adcb74a/attachment.html>

From chris at ochsnet.com  Wed Mar 14 19:32:01 2012
From: chris at ochsnet.com (Chris Ochs)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:32:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] controller spec not loading controller classes
Message-ID: <17996579.14.1331753521755.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbnd12>

This is jruby 1.6.7, rspec 2, rails 3.0.9.

I have a simple controller spec as follows:

describe MoneyController, :type => :controller do
  describe "GET payout" do
    it "Pays out currency to user" do
      money = double("Cloud::Money")
      get :payout
    end
  end
end

Running rake spec results in the following.   MoneyController is in 
app/controllers, but rspec isn't loading any of my controllers. 

NameError: uninitialized constant MoneyController
    const_missing at org/jruby/RubyModule.java:2642
    const_missing at 
/home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/backward_compatibility.rb:24
           (root) at 
/home/marvel/server/rails/spec/controllers/money_controller_spec.rb:1
             load at org/jruby/RubyKernel.java:1058
  load_spec_files at 
/home/marvel/server/rails/spec/controllers/money_controller_spec.rb:698
          collect at org/jruby/RubyArray.java:2331
  load_spec_files at 
/home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:698
              run at 
/home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/command_line.rb:22
   run_in_process at 
/home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:80
              run at 
/home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:69
          autorun at 
/home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:10


Digging deeper, I see  that rake spec loads up rails, then quits and then 
just runs rspec manually? It does this for all types of rspec tests.  Wth? 
  Immediately before the above backtrace, this is what I see:

/home/marvel/.rvm/rubies/jruby-1.6.7/bin/jruby -S rspec ./spec/test_spec.rb 
./spec/controllers/money_controller_spec.rb ./spec/models/dataset_spec.rb

Chris

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120314/c88b6ae2/attachment-0001.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Mar 14 20:37:44 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:37:44 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] controller spec not loading controller classes
In-Reply-To: <17996579.14.1331753521755.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbnd12>
References: <17996579.14.1331753521755.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbnd12>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWRWAxNMNh1ch+cQovSXWQ7yMCavRfy2cMFd+L=Ho945_A@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Chris Ochs <chris at ochsnet.com> wrote:
> This is jruby 1.6.7, rspec 2, rails 3.0.9.
>
> I have a simple controller spec as follows:

Does this file require "spec_helper"? If not, that's probably the problem.

> describe MoneyController, :type => :controller do
> ? describe "GET payout" do
> ??? it "Pays out currency to user" do
> ????? money = double("Cloud::Money")
> ????? get :payout
> ??? end
> ? end
> end
>
> Running rake spec results in the following.?? MoneyController is in
> app/controllers, but rspec isn't loading any of my controllers.
>
> NameError: uninitialized constant MoneyController
> ??? const_missing at org/jruby/RubyModule.java:2642
> ??? const_missing at
> /home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/backward_compatibility.rb:24
> ?????????? (root) at
> /home/marvel/server/rails/spec/controllers/money_controller_spec.rb:1
> ???????????? load at org/jruby/RubyKernel.java:1058
> ? load_spec_files at
> /home/marvel/server/rails/spec/controllers/money_controller_spec.rb:698
> ????????? collect at org/jruby/RubyArray.java:2331
> ? load_spec_files at
> /home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:698
> ????????????? run at
> /home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/command_line.rb:22
> ?? run_in_process at
> /home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:80
> ????????????? run at
> /home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:69
> ????????? autorun at
> /home/marvel/.rvm/gems/jruby-1.6.7/gems/rspec-core-2.8.0/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:10
>
>
> Digging deeper, I see? that rake spec loads up rails, then quits and then
> just runs rspec manually? It does this for all types of rspec tests.? Wth?

When you run "rake anything" in Rails, you start off in the
development environment, so rspec's rake task (and rails' test task)
shells out to a new process, allowing spec/spec_helper.rb (or
test/test_helper.rb) to set the environment to 'test' (or anything you
replace that with).

Unfortunately, the end result is you load the rails env twice. You can
bypass this by just typing rspec directly.

> Immediately before the above backtrace, this is what I see:
>
> /home/marvel/.rvm/rubies/jruby-1.6.7/bin/jruby -S rspec ./spec/test_spec.rb
> ./spec/controllers/money_controller_spec.rb ./spec/models/dataset_spec.rb
>
> Chris
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From chris at ochsnet.com  Wed Mar 14 20:46:49 2012
From: chris at ochsnet.com (Chris Ochs)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] controller spec not loading controller classes
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWRWAxNMNh1ch+cQovSXWQ7yMCavRfy2cMFd+L=Ho945_A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17996579.14.1331753521755.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbnd12>
	<CAKw-oWRWAxNMNh1ch+cQovSXWQ7yMCavRfy2cMFd+L=Ho945_A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16285030.382.1331758010019.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjw14>



On Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:37:44 PM UTC-7, dchel... at gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Chris Ochs <chris at ochsnet.com> wrote:
> > This is jruby 1.6.7, rspec 2, rails 3.0.9.
> >
> > I have a simple controller spec as follows:
>
> Does this file require "spec_helper"? If not, that's probably the problem.
>

Ok I feel dumb now.  I was thinking there had to be something really simple 
and stupid I was missing, and that's it:)

Thanks!

Chris 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120314/434654f0/attachment.html>

From chris at ochsnet.com  Wed Mar 14 20:46:49 2012
From: chris at ochsnet.com (Chris Ochs)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] controller spec not loading controller classes
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWRWAxNMNh1ch+cQovSXWQ7yMCavRfy2cMFd+L=Ho945_A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <17996579.14.1331753521755.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbnd12>
	<CAKw-oWRWAxNMNh1ch+cQovSXWQ7yMCavRfy2cMFd+L=Ho945_A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <16285030.382.1331758010019.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjw14>



On Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:37:44 PM UTC-7, dchel... at gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Chris Ochs <chris at ochsnet.com> wrote:
> > This is jruby 1.6.7, rspec 2, rails 3.0.9.
> >
> > I have a simple controller spec as follows:
>
> Does this file require "spec_helper"? If not, that's probably the problem.
>

Ok I feel dumb now.  I was thinking there had to be something really simple 
and stupid I was missing, and that's it:)

Thanks!

Chris 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120314/434654f0/attachment-0001.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Wed Mar 14 20:57:06 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 15:57:06 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] controller spec not loading controller classes
In-Reply-To: <16285030.382.1331758010019.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjw14>
References: <17996579.14.1331753521755.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbnd12>
	<CAKw-oWRWAxNMNh1ch+cQovSXWQ7yMCavRfy2cMFd+L=Ho945_A@mail.gmail.com>
	<16285030.382.1331758010019.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynjw14>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWT9gM0PRsZ5wq+TUx0LqEt2jbaXjoodrOUUwTaSogifLw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Chris Ochs <chris at ochsnet.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wednesday, March 14, 2012 1:37:44 PM UTC-7, dchel... at gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Chris Ochs <chris at ochsnet.com> wrote:
>> > This is jruby 1.6.7, rspec 2, rails 3.0.9.
>> >
>> > I have a simple controller spec as follows:
>>
>> Does this file require "spec_helper"? If not, that's probably the problem.
>
>
> Ok I feel dumb now.? I was thinking there had to be something really simple
> and stupid I was missing, and that's it:)

Happy to help.

Cheers,
David

From husseini.mel at gmail.com  Thu Mar 15 12:46:12 2012
From: husseini.mel at gmail.com (Mohamad El-Husseini)
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 05:46:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Can some one please explain why one of those two
 examples fails?
In-Reply-To: <CADYkP0k8P9=mE-Ae-np77e1KY9SEMWSsbwMBgiVTq9fJUUwFvg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4496136.618.1331682935545.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbga3>
	<CADYkP0k8P9=mE-Ae-np77e1KY9SEMWSsbwMBgiVTq9fJUUwFvg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <17250109.328.1331815572098.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynel5>

Thanks, Mike. I appreciate the explanation. It's tricky knowing what runs 
when, and what variable is in what scope. It seems like "code smell" to add 
an instance variable to the before block.

I don't understand what advantage one approach has over the other. What 
would you use, the first, that was broken, or the second?

On Tuesday, March 13, 2012 9:24:03 PM UTC-3, Mike Mazur wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 07:55, Mohamad El-Husseini
> <husseini.mel at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The following are what I believe two ways of doing the same thing. Only 
> the
> > first example fails, while the latter passes.
>
> In your failing example:
>
>    context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
>       let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>       before do
>         user.send_password_reset
>         last_token = user.password_reset_token
>         user.send_password_reset
>       end
>       its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == last_token }
>     end
>
> The `last_token` variable is in scope in the before block, but not in
> the its block. You can fix this by changing it to an instance
> variable:
>
>    context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
>       let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>       before do
>         user.send_password_reset
>         @last_token = user.password_reset_token
>         user.send_password_reset
>       end
>       its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == @last_token }
>     end
>
> Another gotcha is: what is the its expression making assertions on?
> The its method requires a subject to be defined.
>
> RSpec defines an implicit subject based on the described class. I
> imagine at the top of your .spec file you have something like:
>
>   describe User do
>     # stuff
>   end
>
> RSpec will generate a subject by calling `User.new`.
> `password_reset_token` is then called on this new user instance in the
> its block. You most certainly wanted to call `password_reset_token` on
> the user object defined by the `let` statement.
>
> So I think this should do the trick:
>
>    context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
>       let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>       subject { user }
>       before do
>         user.send_password_reset
>         @last_token = user.password_reset_token
>         user.send_password_reset
>       end
>       its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == @last_token }
>     end
>
> You can read more about RSpec's subject here:
>
>   https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/docs/subject
>
> Hope that helps,
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120315/79e4e690/attachment.html>

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Thu Mar 15 14:54:04 2012
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 10:54:04 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Can some one please explain why one of those two
 examples fails?
In-Reply-To: <17250109.328.1331815572098.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynel5>
References: <4496136.618.1331682935545.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbga3>
	<CADYkP0k8P9=mE-Ae-np77e1KY9SEMWSsbwMBgiVTq9fJUUwFvg@mail.gmail.com>
	<17250109.328.1331815572098.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynel5>
Message-ID: <CA+e84E3VsOAjzOW408bRtgr_f11se1Km4MnBdF9_K4Enwq9Z1A@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Mohamad El-Husseini
<husseini.mel at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Mike. I appreciate the explanation. It's tricky knowing what runs
> when, and what variable is in what scope. It seems like "code smell" to add
> an instance variable to the before block.
>
> I don't understand what advantage one approach has over the other. What
> would you use, the first, that was broken, or the second?

I am assuming you're asking about what the advantage of using #subject
vs. just #user is? If so, here are some advantages of using #subject
IMO:

RSpec will provide an implicit #subject already and in many cases you
don't need to construct a new one. This gets rid of an unnecessary
line in those instances. Here's an example from the docs:

    describe Array do
      it "should be empty when first created" do
        subject.should be_empty
      end
    end

   See https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/docs/subject/implicitly-defined-subject
for more info.

Rspec's one liner syntax uses #subject, straight out of the docs is a
great example:

    describe Array do
      describe "with 3 items" do
        subject { [1,2,3] }
        it { should_not be_empty }
      end
    end

   See https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/v/2-8/docs/subject/implicit-receiver
for more information.
   Also see https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/v/2-8/docs/subject/attribute-of-subject

Since #subject is an RSpec convention when writing shared example
groups they are often set up to expect subject to be defined by the
including example group. Here's an example practically from the docs:

    shared_examples "a measurable object" do |value|
      it "should return #{value} from #length" do
        subject.send(:length).should ==value
      end
    end

    describe Array, "with 3 items" do
      subject { [1, 2, 3] }
      it_should_behave_like "a measurable object", 3
    end

    See https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/v/2-8/docs/example-groups/shared-examples
for more info.

And since #subject is an RSpec convention, it always implies the
"thing" under test. So, if you want to know what you're testing you
can either do a visual scan for a subject block or simply look at the
class/module being described.

Those are the reasons I find #subject to have advantage. By
themselves, none of these are huge reasons, but combined, and over
time, I have found relying on convention and getting a few extra
niceties in my specs outweighs going against the convention and trying
to reinvent conventions when I hit things like one-liners or shared
examples/contexts.

My 2 cents,

Zach


>
>
> On Tuesday, March 13, 2012 9:24:03 PM UTC-3, Mike Mazur wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 07:55, Mohamad El-Husseini
>> <husseini.mel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > The following are what I believe two ways of doing the same thing. Only
>> > the
>> > first example fails, while the latter passes.
>>
>> In your failing example:
>>
>> ? ?context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
>> ? ? ? let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>> ? ? ? before do
>> ? ? ? ? user.send_password_reset
>> ? ? ? ? last_token = user.password_reset_token
>> ? ? ? ? user.send_password_reset
>> ? ? ? end
>> ? ? ? its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == last_token }
>> ? ? end
>>
>> The `last_token` variable is in scope in the before block, but not in
>> the its block. You can fix this by changing it to an instance
>> variable:
>>
>> ? ?context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
>> ? ? ? let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>> ? ? ? before do
>> ? ? ? ? user.send_password_reset
>> ? ? ? ? @last_token = user.password_reset_token
>> ? ? ? ? user.send_password_reset
>> ? ? ? end
>> ? ? ? its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == @last_token }
>> ? ? end
>>
>> Another gotcha is: what is the its expression making assertions on?
>> The its method requires a subject to be defined.
>>
>> RSpec defines an implicit subject based on the described class. I
>> imagine at the top of your .spec file you have something like:
>>
>> ? describe User do
>> ? ? # stuff
>> ? end
>>
>> RSpec will generate a subject by calling `User.new`.
>> `password_reset_token` is then called on this new user instance in the
>> its block. You most certainly wanted to call `password_reset_token` on
>> the user object defined by the `let` statement.
>>
>> So I think this should do the trick:
>>
>> ? ?context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
>> ? ? ? let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>> ? ? ? subject { user }
>> ? ? ? before do
>> ? ? ? ? user.send_password_reset
>> ? ? ? ? @last_token = user.password_reset_token
>> ? ? ? ? user.send_password_reset
>> ? ? ? end
>> ? ? ? its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == @last_token }
>> ? ? end
>>
>> You can read more about RSpec's subject here:
>>
>> ? https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/docs/subject
>>
>> Hope that helps,
>> Mike
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users



-- 

--
@zachdennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com

From rockrep at gmail.com  Thu Mar 15 14:53:56 2012
From: rockrep at gmail.com (Michael Kintzer)
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 07:53:56 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Can some one please explain why one of those two
	examples fails?
In-Reply-To: <4496136.618.1331682935545.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbga3>
References: <4496136.618.1331682935545.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbga3>
Message-ID: <02F826FC-B306-4897-9035-A6D26D7EE301@gmail.com>

In your first example, last_token is declared in a before block, which means you need to mark it as an instance variable of the ExampleGroup '@' to reference it in the examples within the context.   You don't need to do that when you use let.

Also you don't need to declare the redundant let creating a user in that first context, since it was declared outside of the context already.

HTH

Michael

On Mar 13, 2012, at 4:55 PM, Mohamad El-Husseini <husseini.mel at gmail.com> wrote:

> The following are what I believe two ways of doing the same thing. Only the first example fails, while the latter passes. I'm finding it hard to get to understand describe and context blocks, particularly with respect to scopes. I would appreciate any "for dummies" explanation, or a link to a blog post that can clear this up for me. I'm still new to Rails and Ruby.
> 
>   describe "send password reset" do
>     let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
> 
>     # This fails
>     context "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
>       let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
>       before do
>         user.send_password_reset
>         last_token = user.password_reset_token
>         user.send_password_reset
>       end
>       its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == last_token }
>     end
> 
>     # This passes
>     it "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
>       user.send_password_reset
>       last_token = user.password_reset_token
>       user.send_password_reset
>       user.password_reset_token.should_not == last_token
>     end
>   end
> 
> The first example fails with this:
> 
> Failure/Error: its(:password_reset_token) { should_not == last_token }
>      NameError:
>        undefined local variable or method `last_token' for #<RSpec::Core::ExampleGroup::Nested_6::Nested_7::Nested_1::Nested_1:0x0000000561e130>
> 
> Earlier, it out puts this:
> 
>  should not When you call a matcher in an example without a String, like this:
> 
> specify { object.should matcher }
> 
> or this:
> 
> it { should matcher }
> 
> RSpec expects the matcher to have a #description method. You should either
> add a String to the example this matcher is being used in, or give it a
> description method. Then you won't have to suffer this lengthy warning again.
>  (FAILED - 1)
> 
> 
> Another thing I noticed is that I can not use capybara inside of describe blocks unless the calls are in a before block... but I don't understand why.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From mmazur at gmail.com  Sat Mar 17 11:24:47 2012
From: mmazur at gmail.com (Mike Mazur)
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 19:24:47 +0800
Subject: [rspec-users] Can some one please explain why one of those two
 examples fails?
In-Reply-To: <17250109.328.1331815572098.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynel5>
References: <4496136.618.1331682935545.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbga3>
	<CADYkP0k8P9=mE-Ae-np77e1KY9SEMWSsbwMBgiVTq9fJUUwFvg@mail.gmail.com>
	<17250109.328.1331815572098.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@ynel5>
Message-ID: <CADYkP0=bE6=WU88JjWpv1O3QRSxbM4FChrqkDV+r4QfsWhvY0A@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 20:46, Mohamad El-Husseini
<husseini.mel at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Mike. I appreciate the explanation. It's tricky knowing what runs
> when, and what variable is in what scope. It seems like "code smell" to add
> an instance variable to the before block.
>
> I don't understand what advantage one approach has over the other. What
> would you use, the first, that was broken, or the second?

I would probably use `expect`[1]:

  describe "send password reset" do
    let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }

    it "generates a unique password_reset_token" do
      expect { user.send_password_reset }.to change(user, :password_reset_token)
    end

    # Or if you want to make sure a token is generated twice
    it "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
      user.send_password_reset
      expect { user.send_password_reset }.to change(user, :password_reset_token)
    end

    # or perhaps
    it "generates a unique password_reset_token each time" do
      2.times do
        expect { user.send_password_reset }.to change(user,
:password_reset_token)
      end
    end
  end

Mike


[1]: https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/v/2-0/docs/matchers/expect-change

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sat Mar 17 23:13:53 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 18:13:53 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-2.9.0 is released!
Message-ID: <3EF5D0F8-D00A-4F40-B88A-E35349CD56DA@gmail.com>

rspec-2.9.0 is released wtih lots of bug fixes and a few minor feature improvements as well. Enjoy!

### rspec-core-2.9.0 / 2012-03-17
[full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0)

Enhancements

* Support for "X minutes X seconds" spec run duration in formatter. (uzzz)
* Strip whitespace from group and example names in doc formatter.
* Removed spork-0.9 shim. If you're using spork-0.8.x, you'll need to upgrade
  to 0.9.0.

Bug fixes

* Restore `--full_backtrace` option
* Ensure that values passed to `config.filter_run` are respected when running
  over DRb (using spork).
* Ensure shared example groups are reset after a run (as example groups are).
* Remove `rescue false` from calls to filters represented as Procs
* Ensure described_class gets the closest constant (pyromaniac)
* In "autorun", don't run the specs in the at_exit hook if there was an
  exception (most likely due to a SyntaxError). (sunaku)
* Don't extend groups with modules already used to extend ancestor groups.
* `its` correctly memoizes nil or false values (Yamada Masaki)

### rspec-expectations-2.9.0 / 2012-03-17
[full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0)

Enhancements

* Move built-in matcher classes to RSpec::Matchers::BuiltIn to reduce pollution
  of RSpec::Matchers (which is included in every example).
* Autoload files with matcher classes to improve load time.

Bug fixes

* Align `respond_to?` and `method_missing` in DSL-defined matchers.
* Clear out user-defined instance variables between invocations of DSL-defined
  matchers.
* Dup the instance of a DSL generated matcher so its state is not changed by
  subsequent invocations.
* Treat expected args consistently across positive and negative expectations
  (thanks to Ralf Kistner for the heads up)

### rspec-mocks-2.9.0 / 2012-03-17
[full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/compare/v2.8.0...v2.9.0)

Enhancements

* Support order constraints across objects (preethiramdev)

Bug fixes

* Allow a `as_null_object` to be passed to `with`
* Pass proc to block passed to stub (Aubrey Rhodes)
* Initialize child message expectation args to match any args (#109 -
  preethiramdev)

### rspec-rails-2.9.0 / 2012-03-17
[full changelog](http://github.com/rspec/rspec-rails/compare/v2.8.1...v2.9.0)

Enhancments

* add description method to RouteToMatcher (John Wulff)
* Run "db:test:clone_structure" instead of "db:test:prepare" if Active Record's
  schema format is ":sql". (Andrey Voronkov)

Bug fixes

* `mock_model(XXX).as_null_object.unknown_method` returns self again
* Generated view specs use different IDs for each attribute.


From myron.marston at gmail.com  Sat Mar 17 21:51:25 2012
From: myron.marston at gmail.com (Myron Marston)
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 14:51:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <887CD80B-70C3-4BF6-801E-B890F911D777@gmail.com>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWT1YBXpAiUHYYn2QHjM-2-2Q8Uapgx+UtZRgNWOyTMExw@mail.gmail.com>
	<C1ACF295-5EED-4E3C-913D-117C6A26EA7D@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWQANE32f7w8H_oOuAsePF7ir3t6mSi0VMCkOoDRHvtA8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<887CD80B-70C3-4BF6-801E-B890F911D777@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee16126d-5afb-4df2-b627-adf634e5ceac@s9g2000pba.googlegroups.com>

I've been thinking about this a bit ever since Zach Dennis brought up
the issue on another rspec-expectations ticket [1]. I've come up with
a proof-of-concept matcher that works pretty well, I think [2].
Here's how you use it:

expect { |b| 3.tap(&b) }.to yield_value(3)

The argument passed to the expect block is a little weird, given that
no other block expectations take a block argument like this.  But I
don't see a way around it--for the matcher to detect whether or not an
argument is yielded (and what the argument is), it needs to control
the block passed to the method-under-test.  One big win here over some
of the other suggestions I've seen is that it works just fine with the
current rspec-expectations API (in contrast, some of the other
suggestions I've seen would special-case this matcher so that `expect`
takes multiple arguments for it to work).  I also like that it's built
as a block expectation; to me it is in the same category of matchers
as the change, raise_error and throw_symbol matchers: it's something
that happens as the result of running a bit of code.

If enough people like this we can work on getting it into rspec-
expectations as an officially supported matcher.  If we did, I'd want
to beef it up to be significantly more flexible:

# for methods that yield multiple arguments to the block...
# yield_value would accept a splat of args, and yield_values would
# be a more-grammatically-correct alias.
expect { |b| foo.fizz(&b) }.to yield_values(:a, 15)

# I'd advocate the matcher using the === operator w/ the given values,
# so either of these would work
expect { |b| "abc".gsub("a", &b) }.to yield_value(String)
expect { |b| "abc".gsub("a", &b) }.to yield_value(/a/)

# for cases where you need more control over matching the yielded
value, pass a block
expect { |b| foo.fizz(&b) }.to yield_value { |val| val.should
be_fizzy }

Thoughts?

[1] https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/pull/119#issuecomment-4520633
[2] https://gist.github.com/2065445

From jko170 at gmail.com  Sat Mar 17 23:52:57 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 17:52:57 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <ee16126d-5afb-4df2-b627-adf634e5ceac@s9g2000pba.googlegroups.com>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWT1YBXpAiUHYYn2QHjM-2-2Q8Uapgx+UtZRgNWOyTMExw@mail.gmail.com>
	<C1ACF295-5EED-4E3C-913D-117C6A26EA7D@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWQANE32f7w8H_oOuAsePF7ir3t6mSi0VMCkOoDRHvtA8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<887CD80B-70C3-4BF6-801E-B890F911D777@gmail.com>
	<ee16126d-5afb-4df2-b627-adf634e5ceac@s9g2000pba.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <DE8B6700-729F-4DD1-B7E6-28E36BEE6A16@gmail.com>


On Mar 17, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Myron Marston wrote:

> I've been thinking about this a bit ever since Zach Dennis brought up
> the issue on another rspec-expectations ticket [1]. I've come up with
> a proof-of-concept matcher that works pretty well, I think [2].
> Here's how you use it:
> 
> expect { |b| 3.tap(&b) }.to yield_value(3)
> 
> The argument passed to the expect block is a little weird, given that
> no other block expectations take a block argument like this.  But I
> don't see a way around it--for the matcher to detect whether or not an
> argument is yielded (and what the argument is), it needs to control
> the block passed to the method-under-test.  One big win here over some
> of the other suggestions I've seen is that it works just fine with the
> current rspec-expectations API (in contrast, some of the other
> suggestions I've seen would special-case this matcher so that `expect`
> takes multiple arguments for it to work).  I also like that it's built
> as a block expectation; to me it is in the same category of matchers
> as the change, raise_error and throw_symbol matchers: it's something
> that happens as the result of running a bit of code.
> 
> If enough people like this we can work on getting it into rspec-
> expectations as an officially supported matcher.  If we did, I'd want
> to beef it up to be significantly more flexible:
> 
> # for methods that yield multiple arguments to the block...
> # yield_value would accept a splat of args, and yield_values would
> # be a more-grammatically-correct alias.
> expect { |b| foo.fizz(&b) }.to yield_values(:a, 15)
> 
> # I'd advocate the matcher using the === operator w/ the given values,
> # so either of these would work
> expect { |b| "abc".gsub("a", &b) }.to yield_value(String)
> expect { |b| "abc".gsub("a", &b) }.to yield_value(/a/)
> 
> # for cases where you need more control over matching the yielded
> value, pass a block
> expect { |b| foo.fizz(&b) }.to yield_value { |val| val.should
> be_fizzy }

Love this.

> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> [1] https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/pull/119#issuecomment-4520633
> [2] https://gist.github.com/2065445
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From luke at lukemelia.com  Sun Mar 18 00:40:35 2012
From: luke at lukemelia.com (Luke Melia)
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2012 20:40:35 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-2.9.0 is released!
In-Reply-To: <3EF5D0F8-D00A-4F40-B88A-E35349CD56DA@gmail.com>
References: <3EF5D0F8-D00A-4F40-B88A-E35349CD56DA@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CBA3C30349C14326B786FDE00B764B19@lukemelia.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120317/52841229/attachment.html>

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Sun Mar 18 04:35:39 2012
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2012 00:35:39 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] Asserting on a yield
In-Reply-To: <DE8B6700-729F-4DD1-B7E6-28E36BEE6A16@gmail.com>
References: <E13CC40F-20B1-4B09-8C16-4F45572FED71@mattwynne.net>
	<158B0125-4E9E-4228-91A5-B48202FBB44E@gmail.com>
	<A97B71BF-5077-400F-B619-D09B5E06A2D3@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWT1YBXpAiUHYYn2QHjM-2-2Q8Uapgx+UtZRgNWOyTMExw@mail.gmail.com>
	<C1ACF295-5EED-4E3C-913D-117C6A26EA7D@mattwynne.net>
	<CAKw-oWQANE32f7w8H_oOuAsePF7ir3t6mSi0VMCkOoDRHvtA8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<887CD80B-70C3-4BF6-801E-B890F911D777@gmail.com>
	<ee16126d-5afb-4df2-b627-adf634e5ceac@s9g2000pba.googlegroups.com>
	<DE8B6700-729F-4DD1-B7E6-28E36BEE6A16@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA+e84E0EZDWDsngvD2exdjNew_e71cE1r66CtB_Y5RkZQEnavw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 17, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Justin Ko <jko170 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 17, 2012, at 3:51 PM, Myron Marston wrote:
>
>> I've been thinking about this a bit ever since Zach Dennis brought up
>> the issue on another rspec-expectations ticket [1]. I've come up with
>> a proof-of-concept matcher that works pretty well, I think [2].
>> Here's how you use it:
>>
>> expect { |b| 3.tap(&b) }.to yield_value(3)

Thanks for thinking about this some more. I don't think this will work
but I've commented on the Gist with a couple examples which help help
narrow in the implementation. St. Patty's night can be rough on the
mind so I'm not going to pretend that I can code right now.

I'll follow up tomorrow if someone doesn't beat me to it!

Zach


>>
>> The argument passed to the expect block is a little weird, given that
>> no other block expectations take a block argument like this. ?But I
>> don't see a way around it--for the matcher to detect whether or not an
>> argument is yielded (and what the argument is), it needs to control
>> the block passed to the method-under-test. ?One big win here over some
>> of the other suggestions I've seen is that it works just fine with the
>> current rspec-expectations API (in contrast, some of the other
>> suggestions I've seen would special-case this matcher so that `expect`
>> takes multiple arguments for it to work). ?I also like that it's built
>> as a block expectation; to me it is in the same category of matchers
>> as the change, raise_error and throw_symbol matchers: it's something
>> that happens as the result of running a bit of code.
>>
>> If enough people like this we can work on getting it into rspec-
>> expectations as an officially supported matcher. ?If we did, I'd want
>> to beef it up to be significantly more flexible:
>>
>> # for methods that yield multiple arguments to the block...
>> # yield_value would accept a splat of args, and yield_values would
>> # be a more-grammatically-correct alias.
>> expect { |b| foo.fizz(&b) }.to yield_values(:a, 15)
>>
>> # I'd advocate the matcher using the === operator w/ the given values,
>> # so either of these would work
>> expect { |b| "abc".gsub("a", &b) }.to yield_value(String)
>> expect { |b| "abc".gsub("a", &b) }.to yield_value(/a/)
>>
>> # for cases where you need more control over matching the yielded
>> value, pass a block
>> expect { |b| foo.fizz(&b) }.to yield_value { |val| val.should
>> be_fizzy }
>
> Love this.
>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/pull/119#issuecomment-4520633
>> [2] https://gist.github.com/2065445
>> _______________________________________________
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users



-- 

--
@zachdennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com

From ankita.gupta at adslot.com  Tue Mar 20 04:53:51 2012
From: ankita.gupta at adslot.com (Ankita)
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:53:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] issue with running of following code
Message-ID: <729838d6-1402-47df-8d73-845c3eb4685c@vy9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>

I am trying to run following file, it does nothing and even does not
give any error message.. not sure what is the problem.



require "rubygems"
require 'watir-webdriver'
require "rspec"


describe "ASP TEST Suite" do
  before(:all) do
    client = Selenium::WebDriver::Remote::Http::Default.new
        client.timeout = 230 # seconds ? default is 60
        profile = Selenium::WebDriver::Firefox::Profile.new
        driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for(:ff, {:http_client =>
client, :profile => profile})
        $b = Watir::Browser.new(driver)
  end
it "first" do
  	puts "test"
end
   after(:all) do
    $b.close
  end
end

From ankita.gupta at adslot.com  Tue Mar 20 04:49:53 2012
From: ankita.gupta at adslot.com (Ankita)
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 21:49:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] Problem with before(:all) command
Message-ID: <0e99f515-cd36-43a1-923a-988318f68053@qg3g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>

Hi

when I use to run following file, it does not do anything, no error
and nothing. It is meant to open a browser and put some information
but nothing happens. Any help would be really appreciated...


require "rubygems"
require 'watir-webdriver'
require "rspec"

describe "TEST Suite" do
  before(:all) do
    client = Selenium::WebDriver::Remote::Http::Default.new
        client.timeout = 230 # seconds ? default is 60
        profile = Selenium::WebDriver::Firefox::Profile.new
        driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for(:ff, {:http_client =>
client, :profile => profile})
        $b = Watir::Browser.new(driver)
  end
it "first" do
  	puts "test"
end
it "second" do
  	puts "test"
end
   after(:all) do
    $b.close
  end
end

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Mar 20 11:01:29 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 06:01:29 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] issue with running of following code
In-Reply-To: <729838d6-1402-47df-8d73-845c3eb4685c@vy9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
References: <729838d6-1402-47df-8d73-845c3eb4685c@vy9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWRf7MyznD1h9GBJRfTFLyeJHg=DN-BvnbfL2zFiUXE0XQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Ankita <ankita.gupta at adslot.com> wrote:
> I am trying to run following file, it does nothing and even does not
> give any error message.. not sure what is the problem.

How are you running it?

> require "rubygems"
> require 'watir-webdriver'
> require "rspec"
>
>
> describe "ASP TEST Suite" do
> ?before(:all) do
> ? ?client = Selenium::WebDriver::Remote::Http::Default.new
> ? ? ? ?client.timeout = 230 # seconds ? default is 60
> ? ? ? ?profile = Selenium::WebDriver::Firefox::Profile.new
> ? ? ? ?driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for(:ff, {:http_client =>
> client, :profile => profile})
> ? ? ? ?$b = Watir::Browser.new(driver)
> ?end
> it "first" do
> ? ? ? ?puts "test"
> end
> ? after(:all) do
> ? ?$b.close
> ?end
> end
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From ankita.gupta at adslot.com  Tue Mar 20 22:45:57 2012
From: ankita.gupta at adslot.com (Ankita)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 15:45:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] issue with running of following code
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWRf7MyznD1h9GBJRfTFLyeJHg=DN-BvnbfL2zFiUXE0XQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <729838d6-1402-47df-8d73-845c3eb4685c@vy9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
	<CAKw-oWRf7MyznD1h9GBJRfTFLyeJHg=DN-BvnbfL2zFiUXE0XQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9f155604-8478-4224-9d3d-67b01ea14032@pg2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>

I am running by going into specific file folder on command prompt and
writing ruby file_name.rb to run it...

On Mar 20, 10:01?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Ankita <ankita.gu... at adslot.com> wrote:
> > I am trying to run following file, it does nothing and even does not
> > give any error message.. not sure what is the problem.
>
> How are you running it?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > require "rubygems"
> > require 'watir-webdriver'
> > require "rspec"
>
> > describe "ASP TEST Suite" do
> > ?before(:all) do
> > ? ?client = Selenium::WebDriver::Remote::Http::Default.new
> > ? ? ? ?client.timeout = 230 # seconds ? default is 60
> > ? ? ? ?profile = Selenium::WebDriver::Firefox::Profile.new
> > ? ? ? ?driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for(:ff, {:http_client =>
> > client, :profile => profile})
> > ? ? ? ?$b = Watir::Browser.new(driver)
> > ?end
> > it "first" do
> > ? ? ? ?puts "test"
> > end
> > ? after(:all) do
> > ? ?$b.close
> > ?end
> > 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

From zach.dennis at gmail.com  Wed Mar 21 00:20:03 2012
From: zach.dennis at gmail.com (Zach Dennis)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 20:20:03 -0400
Subject: [rspec-users] issue with running of following code
In-Reply-To: <9f155604-8478-4224-9d3d-67b01ea14032@pg2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
References: <729838d6-1402-47df-8d73-845c3eb4685c@vy9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
	<CAKw-oWRf7MyznD1h9GBJRfTFLyeJHg=DN-BvnbfL2zFiUXE0XQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<9f155604-8478-4224-9d3d-67b01ea14032@pg2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <CA+e84E1221t2mDidHo1u59D5xSSRYYzMqXR3QzWCoSbEznuJng@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Ankita <ankita.gupta at adslot.com> wrote:
> I am running by going into specific file folder on command prompt and
> writing ruby file_name.rb to run it...

You'll see less headache if use the "rspec" command instead of ruby to
run your specs:

   rspec file_name_spec.rb

Or, is there a reason why you want to invoke rspec without the rspec command?

Zach




>
> On Mar 20, 10:01?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Ankita <ankita.gu... at adslot.com> wrote:
>> > I am trying to run following file, it does nothing and even does not
>> > give any error message.. not sure what is the problem.
>>
>> How are you running it?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > require "rubygems"
>> > require 'watir-webdriver'
>> > require "rspec"
>>
>> > describe "ASP TEST Suite" do
>> > ?before(:all) do
>> > ? ?client = Selenium::WebDriver::Remote::Http::Default.new
>> > ? ? ? ?client.timeout = 230 # seconds ? default is 60
>> > ? ? ? ?profile = Selenium::WebDriver::Firefox::Profile.new
>> > ? ? ? ?driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for(:ff, {:http_client =>
>> > client, :profile => profile})
>> > ? ? ? ?$b = Watir::Browser.new(driver)
>> > ?end
>> > it "first" do
>> > ? ? ? ?puts "test"
>> > end
>> > ? after(:all) do
>> > ? ?$b.close
>> > ?end
>> > 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-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users



-- 

--
@zachdennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com

From ankita.gupta at adslot.com  Wed Mar 21 00:58:00 2012
From: ankita.gupta at adslot.com (Ankita)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 17:58:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] issue with running of following code
In-Reply-To: <CA+e84E1221t2mDidHo1u59D5xSSRYYzMqXR3QzWCoSbEznuJng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <729838d6-1402-47df-8d73-845c3eb4685c@vy9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
	<CAKw-oWRf7MyznD1h9GBJRfTFLyeJHg=DN-BvnbfL2zFiUXE0XQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<9f155604-8478-4224-9d3d-67b01ea14032@pg2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
	<CA+e84E1221t2mDidHo1u59D5xSSRYYzMqXR3QzWCoSbEznuJng@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7f1ad477-47e1-4935-8919-15a7ac0afd60@x10g2000pbi.googlegroups.com>

It does work  by running with  rspec file_name_spec.rb. Thanks for
that!

There is another issue, I wrote my tests in watir and there is
following command which use to run pretty well with Watir but now it
gives error of undefined method 'confirm'

$b.confirm(true) do
      $b.button(:value,"reload").when_present.fire_event'onclick' #
Reset the Database
    end


I used this command to click on a button which use to give some java
script pop up and if you click on that pop up use to take a while
scrubbing my database.
Not sure how I could still use this command.

On Mar 21, 11:20?am, Zach Dennis <zach.den... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Ankita <ankita.gu... at adslot.com> wrote:
> > I am running by going into specific file folder on command prompt and
> > writing ruby file_name.rb to run it...
>
> You'll see less headache if use the "rspec" command instead of ruby to
> run your specs:
>
> ? ?rspec file_name_spec.rb
>
> Or, is there a reason why you want to invoke rspec without the rspec command?
>
> Zach
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 20, 10:01?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Ankita <ankita.gu... at adslot.com> wrote:
> >> > I am trying to run following file, it does nothing and even does not
> >> > give any error message.. not sure what is the problem.
>
> >> How are you running it?
>
> >> > require "rubygems"
> >> > require 'watir-webdriver'
> >> > require "rspec"
>
> >> > describe "ASP TEST Suite" do
> >> > ?before(:all) do
> >> > ? ?client = Selenium::WebDriver::Remote::Http::Default.new
> >> > ? ? ? ?client.timeout = 230 # seconds ? default is 60
> >> > ? ? ? ?profile = Selenium::WebDriver::Firefox::Profile.new
> >> > ? ? ? ?driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for(:ff, {:http_client =>
> >> > client, :profile => profile})
> >> > ? ? ? ?$b = Watir::Browser.new(driver)
> >> > ?end
> >> > it "first" do
> >> > ? ? ? ?puts "test"
> >> > end
> >> > ? after(:all) do
> >> > ? ?$b.close
> >> > ?end
> >> > 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
>
> --
>
> --
> @zachdennishttp://www.continuousthinking.comhttp://www.mutuallyhuman.com
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From ankita.gupta at adslot.com  Wed Mar 21 01:31:15 2012
From: ankita.gupta at adslot.com (Ankita)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:31:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] issue with running of following code
In-Reply-To: <7f1ad477-47e1-4935-8919-15a7ac0afd60@x10g2000pbi.googlegroups.com>
References: <729838d6-1402-47df-8d73-845c3eb4685c@vy9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>
	<CAKw-oWRf7MyznD1h9GBJRfTFLyeJHg=DN-BvnbfL2zFiUXE0XQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<9f155604-8478-4224-9d3d-67b01ea14032@pg2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
	<CA+e84E1221t2mDidHo1u59D5xSSRYYzMqXR3QzWCoSbEznuJng@mail.gmail.com>
	<7f1ad477-47e1-4935-8919-15a7ac0afd60@x10g2000pbi.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <221aaa37-887f-4b8c-9119-e515adc5b87e@oq7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>

the error I got when I run the script using rspec
file_name_spec.rb .... when I used to run using ruby
file_name_spec.rb  it was fine

On Mar 21, 11:58?am, Ankita <ankita.gu... at adslot.com> wrote:
> It does work ?by running with ?rspec file_name_spec.rb. Thanks for
> that!
>
> There is another issue, I wrote my tests in watir and there is
> following command which use to run pretty well with Watir but now it
> gives error of undefined method 'confirm'
>
> $b.confirm(true) do
> ? ? ? $b.button(:value,"reload").when_present.fire_event'onclick' #
> Reset the Database
> ? ? end
>
> I used this command to click on a button which use to give some java
> script pop up and if you click on that pop up use to take a while
> scrubbing my database.
> Not sure how I could still use this command.
>
> On Mar 21, 11:20?am, Zach Dennis <zach.den... at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Ankita <ankita.gu... at adslot.com> wrote:
> > > I am running by going into specific file folder on command prompt and
> > > writing ruby file_name.rb to run it...
>
> > You'll see less headache if use the "rspec" command instead of ruby to
> > run your specs:
>
> > ? ?rspec file_name_spec.rb
>
> > Or, is there a reason why you want to invoke rspec without the rspec command?
>
> > Zach
>
> > > On Mar 20, 10:01?pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim... at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Ankita <ankita.gu... at adslot.com> wrote:
> > >> > I am trying to run following file, it does nothing and even does not
> > >> > give any error message.. not sure what is the problem.
>
> > >> How are you running it?
>
> > >> > require "rubygems"
> > >> > require 'watir-webdriver'
> > >> > require "rspec"
>
> > >> > describe "ASP TEST Suite" do
> > >> > ?before(:all) do
> > >> > ? ?client = Selenium::WebDriver::Remote::Http::Default.new
> > >> > ? ? ? ?client.timeout = 230 # seconds ? default is 60
> > >> > ? ? ? ?profile = Selenium::WebDriver::Firefox::Profile.new
> > >> > ? ? ? ?driver = Selenium::WebDriver.for(:ff, {:http_client =>
> > >> > client, :profile => profile})
> > >> > ? ? ? ?$b = Watir::Browser.new(driver)
> > >> > ?end
> > >> > it "first" do
> > >> > ? ? ? ?puts "test"
> > >> > end
> > >> > ? after(:all) do
> > >> > ? ?$b.close
> > >> > ?end
> > >> > 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
>
> > --
>
> > --
> > @zachdennishttp://www.continuousthinking.comhttp://www.mutuallyhuman.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

From tyler.scott.dewitt at gmail.com  Wed Mar 21 01:01:08 2012
From: tyler.scott.dewitt at gmail.com (Tyler DeWitt)
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 18:01:08 -0700
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing Model Attributes That Are Updated In a
	Controller
Message-ID: <F663D10F-4E33-431D-8623-F9DA14FFA40C@gmail.com>

I've got a controller that updates some attributes of a model:

def confirmation
    @cart = current_cart
    customer = Stripe::Customer.create(description: current_user.email, card: params[:stripeToken])
    current_user.update_attributes(stripe_customer_id: customer.id)
 end

In my spec, how can I ensure the current_user has a stripe_customer_id after this controller is run?

I have this:

it "should create a stripe customer and save that to the stripe_customer_id of the user" do
  @user.reload
  @user.stripe_customer_id.should_not be_nil
end

But it doesn't work (I tried @user.reload because the database is being updated by the call to current_user.update_attributes).

@user is a FactoryGirl created object further up in the test.

Thanks,
Tyler

From srshti at gmail.com  Wed Mar 21 07:55:42 2012
From: srshti at gmail.com (Srushti Ambekallu)
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 13:25:42 +0530
Subject: [rspec-users] Testing Model Attributes That Are Updated In a
	Controller
In-Reply-To: <F663D10F-4E33-431D-8623-F9DA14FFA40C@gmail.com>
References: <F663D10F-4E33-431D-8623-F9DA14FFA40C@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <01B0DD30-AA45-4424-B070-BBF8DB026D8E@gmail.com>

On 21-Mar-2012, at 6:31 AM, Tyler DeWitt wrote:

> I've got a controller that updates some attributes of a model:
> 
> def confirmation
>    @cart = current_cart
>    customer = Stripe::Customer.create(description: current_user.email, card: params[:stripeToken])
>    current_user.update_attributes(stripe_customer_id: customer.id)
> end
> 
> In my spec, how can I ensure the current_user has a stripe_customer_id after this controller is run?
> 
> I have this:
> 
> it "should create a stripe customer and save that to the stripe_customer_id of the user" do
>  @user.reload
>  @user.stripe_customer_id.should_not be_nil
> end
> 
> But it doesn't work (I tried @user.reload because the database is being updated by the call to current_user.update_attributes).
> 
> @user is a FactoryGirl created object further up in the test.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tyler
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

It looks like that ought to work. The first thing I'd suggest is to ensure that your request is actually succeeding and not erroring out or getting redirected due to authentication.

  response.should be_ok

Next, I'd confirm that the two users are the same (in spec & in the controller) by 'puts'ing the ids or something.

Could you confirm that those two fairly common reasons these sorts of things usually fail for me don't apply? Then we can start looking at other possible issues.

Also, I would probably be more specific in my assertion by doing
  @user.stripe_customer.should == Stripe::Customer.last.id

Thanks,
Srushti
http://c42.in


From ankita.gupta at adslot.com  Thu Mar 22 04:50:54 2012
From: ankita.gupta at adslot.com (Ankita)
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 21:50:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] How to handle Java script pop up when you click on a
 button to perform some action to DB
Message-ID: <7351f97c-af1c-466b-b587-947edd12c95e@lf20g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>

Hi

I have a button which when clicked opens a JS pop up for confirmation,
confirming which, basically scrubs my DB and so takes a minute to
complete its action.

When I was using watir, I use to put in following code which use to
work, but when switching to Rspec, it gives error so not sure what
should I be replacing here:


$b.confirm(true) do
      $b.button(:value,"Scrub the DB - Full reset /
reload").when_present.fire_event'onclick'
    end

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Thu Mar 22 14:54:16 2012
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Pito Salas)
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 15:54:16 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] Rspec not loading fixtures
Message-ID: <9fcec270cb5b38b104c8532622639982@ruby-forum.com>

I am taking over a code base and am trying to run the tests. I am
somewhat new to RSpec so this might be a trivial problem.

Basically I can tell that the fixtures are not getting loaded. All 100
tests fail with a similar error.

But I don't know why.  Below is the code, with my narrative with ***
before it... Can you see anything or give me a clue where to look. So
far I am coming up empty...

Thanks!

Pito Salas

**** In spec_helper.rb, which I know is running, I see:

Spec::Runner.configure do |config|
  config.global_fixtures = :all
end

**** One of the tests in spec/controllers/downloads_controller_spec.rb
is below. I know it is running and I know that before the 'describe',
Partner.count == 0, so no fixture.

require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper')

describe DownloadsController do
  integrate_views

  describe "when PDF is ready" do
    before(:each) do
      @registrant = Factory.create(:step_5_registrant)
      stub(@registrant).merge_pdf { `touch #{@registrant.pdf_file_path}`
}
      @registrant.generate_pdf
      @registrant.save!
    end

    it "provides a link to download the PDF" do
      get :show, :registrant_id => @registrant.to_param
      assert_not_nil assigns[:registrant]
      assert_response :success
      assert_template "show"
      assert_select "span.button a[target=_blank]"
      assert_select "span.button a[onclick]"
    end

    after(:each) do
      `rm #{@registrant.pdf_file_path}`
    end
  end

**** And here is what in various directories:

spec/fixtures/partners.yml - which contains 2 yaml records:

sponsor:
  id: 1
  username: rtv
  email: rocky at example.com
  crypted_password:
"c8e5b51b237344fe0e72539af0cac7197f094a5e933ffacf6e7fa612363c5933f520710c6427ac31fc4c68a2d7bb48eae601c74b96e7838f9ca1a0740b67576a"
  password_salt: "Y4PPzYx2ert3vC0OhEMo"
  name: Rocky
  organization: Rock The Vote
  url: http://rockthevote.com
  address: 123 Wherever
  city: Washington
  state_id: 9
  zip_code: 20001
  phone: 555-555-1234
  survey_question_1_en: "What school did you go to?"
  survey_question_2_en: "What is your favorite musical group?"
  created_at: <%= Time.now %>
  updated_at: <%= Time.now %>
# TODO: remove partner 2 in production
partner:
  id: 2
  username: bull_winkle
  email: bull_winkle at example.com
  crypted_password:
"c8e5b51b237344fe0e72539af0cac7197f094a5e933ffacf6e7fa612363c5933f520710c6427ac31fc4c68a2d7bb48eae601c74b96e7838f9ca1a0740b67576a"
  password_salt: "Y4PPzYx2ert3vC0OhEMo"
  name: Bullwinkle
  organization: Bullwinkle, Inc.
  url: http://example.com
  address: 123 Wherever
  city: Washington
  state_id: 9
  zip_code: 20001
  phone: 555-555-1234
  survey_question_1_en: "What school did you go to?"
  survey_question_2_en: "What is your favorite musical group?"
  created_at: <%= Time.now %>
  updated_at: <%= Time.now %>

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Thu Mar 22 17:27:23 2012
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Fearless Fool)
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 18:27:23 +0100
Subject: [rspec-users] mocking a reference to a polymorphic model?
Message-ID: <1abf30fade0694534ea1d723088f94ed@ruby-forum.com>

The basic question: how do you mock a reference to a polymorphic class
in RSpec?  Trying the obvious thing leads to an error of the form:

   undefined method `base_class' for Post:Class

=== The details:

# file: app/models/relation.rb
class Relation < ActiveRecord::Base
  belongs_to :entity, :polymorphic => true
end

# file: db/xxx_create_relations.rb
class CreateRelations < ActiveRecord::Migration
  def change
    create_table :relations do |t|
      t.references :entity, :polymorphic => true, :null => false
    end
  end
end

# file: spec/models/relation_spec.rb
describe Relation do
  it 'should create instance without error' do
    post = mock_model("Post")
    lambda { Relation.create!(:entity => @post)}.should_not raise_error
  end
end

=== Running the test:

  1) Relation should create instance without error
     Failure/Error: lambda { Relation.create!(:entity => post)
}.should_not raise_error
       expected no Exception, got #<NoMethodError: undefined method
`base_class' for Post:Class>
     # ./spec/models/relation_spec.rb:39:in `block (2 levels) in <top
(required)>'

My hunch is that ActiveRecord is calling base_class on the mocked model
(Post) to determine what to stick in the 'entity_type' column in the
relations table.  I tried explicitly setting it, as in:

    post = mock_model("Post", :base_class => "Post")

but the error was the same.

For all the reasons that DC espouses, I'd love to mock references to the
polymorphic models, but I don't see how to do that.

Any ideas?

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From chabgood at gmail.com  Thu Mar 22 18:14:07 2012
From: chabgood at gmail.com (Chris Habgood)
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:14:07 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] mocking a reference to a polymorphic model?
In-Reply-To: <1abf30fade0694534ea1d723088f94ed@ruby-forum.com>
References: <1abf30fade0694534ea1d723088f94ed@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <CAKohUFyBGbBPN2ZxYNpXT_ocyLiVS47RciC5upWaRaEUH1ZVAg@mail.gmail.com>

Are you really sure you need a polymorphic table?

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:27, Fearless Fool <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:

> The basic question: how do you mock a reference to a polymorphic class
> in RSpec?  Trying the obvious thing leads to an error of the form:
>
>   undefined method `base_class' for Post:Class
>
> === The details:
>
> # file: app/models/relation.rb
> class Relation < ActiveRecord::Base
>  belongs_to :entity, :polymorphic => true
> end
>
> # file: db/xxx_create_relations.rb
> class CreateRelations < ActiveRecord::Migration
>  def change
>    create_table :relations do |t|
>      t.references :entity, :polymorphic => true, :null => false
>    end
>  end
> end
>
> # file: spec/models/relation_spec.rb
> describe Relation do
>  it 'should create instance without error' do
>    post = mock_model("Post")
>    lambda { Relation.create!(:entity => @post)}.should_not raise_error
>  end
> end
>
> === Running the test:
>
>  1) Relation should create instance without error
>     Failure/Error: lambda { Relation.create!(:entity => post)
> }.should_not raise_error
>       expected no Exception, got #<NoMethodError: undefined method
> `base_class' for Post:Class>
>     # ./spec/models/relation_spec.rb:39:in `block (2 levels) in <top
> (required)>'
>
> My hunch is that ActiveRecord is calling base_class on the mocked model
> (Post) to determine what to stick in the 'entity_type' column in the
> relations table.  I tried explicitly setting it, as in:
>
>    post = mock_model("Post", :base_class => "Post")
>
> but the error was the same.
>
> For all the reasons that DC espouses, I'd love to mock references to the
> polymorphic models, but I don't see how to do that.
>
> Any ideas?
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>



-- 
*"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle,
stand like a rock."
Thomas Jefferson
*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120322/633b8139/attachment.html>

From matt at mattwynne.net  Thu Mar 22 20:10:46 2012
From: matt at mattwynne.net (Matt Wynne)
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 20:10:46 +0000
Subject: [rspec-users] mocking a reference to a polymorphic model?
In-Reply-To: <1abf30fade0694534ea1d723088f94ed@ruby-forum.com>
References: <1abf30fade0694534ea1d723088f94ed@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <23C0E331-B1FE-4C66-BB5C-719FB377D46F@mattwynne.net>


On 22 Mar 2012, at 17:27, Fearless Fool wrote:

> The basic question: how do you mock a reference to a polymorphic class
> in RSpec?  Trying the obvious thing leads to an error of the form:
> 
>   undefined method `base_class' for Post:Class
> 
> === The details:
> 
> # file: app/models/relation.rb
> class Relation < ActiveRecord::Base
>  belongs_to :entity, :polymorphic => true
> end
> 
> # file: db/xxx_create_relations.rb
> class CreateRelations < ActiveRecord::Migration
>  def change
>    create_table :relations do |t|
>      t.references :entity, :polymorphic => true, :null => false
>    end
>  end
> end
> 
> # file: spec/models/relation_spec.rb
> describe Relation do
>  it 'should create instance without error' do
>    post = mock_model("Post")
>    lambda { Relation.create!(:entity => @post)}.should_not raise_error
>  end
> end
> 
> === Running the test:
> 
>  1) Relation should create instance without error
>     Failure/Error: lambda { Relation.create!(:entity => post)
> }.should_not raise_error
>       expected no Exception, got #<NoMethodError: undefined method
> `base_class' for Post:Class>
>     # ./spec/models/relation_spec.rb:39:in `block (2 levels) in <top
> (required)>'
> 
> My hunch is that ActiveRecord is calling base_class on the mocked model
> (Post) to determine what to stick in the 'entity_type' column in the
> relations table.  I tried explicitly setting it, as in:
> 
>    post = mock_model("Post", :base_class => "Post")
> 
> but the error was the same.
> 
> For all the reasons that DC espouses, I'd love to mock references to the
> polymorphic models, but I don't see how to do that.

Can you enumerate those reasons? This doesn't seem like a good use-case for mock_model, to me.

cheers,
Matt

--
Freelance programmer & coach
Author, http://pragprog.com/book/hwcuc/the-cucumber-book
Founder, http://www.relishapp.com/
Twitter, https://twitter.com/mattwynne


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120322/129836c0/attachment-0001.html>

From alexch at gmail.com  Thu Mar 22 21:24:05 2012
From: alexch at gmail.com (Alex Chaffee)
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] bug: rspec rails generator generates a failing
	spec
In-Reply-To: <16351794.73.1332451144960.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbbpk10>
References: <16351794.73.1332451144960.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbbpk10>
Message-ID: <14403969.98.1332451445249.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbboc6>

Oops. This is apparently not an rspec bug after all... the tutorial 
instructions generated the StaticPages controller in a non-standard way. 
Sorry for the false alarm!

On Thursday, March 22, 2012 2:19:04 PM UTC-7, Alex Chaffee wrote:
>
> Using rspec 2.9.0, rspec-rails 2.9.0, rails 3.2.2, following Michael 
> Hartl's RailsTutorial, version 3.2, chapter 3.
>
> Running 
>   rails generate integration_test static_pages
> makes a spec named static_pages_spec.rb that contains the following code
>   get static_pages_index_path
> which causes this error when run
>   
>   1) StaticPages GET /static_pages works! (now write some real specs)
>      Failure/Error: get static_pages_index_path
>      NameError:
>        undefined local variable or method `static_pages_index_path' for 
> #<RSpec::Core::ExampleGroup::?Nested_3::Nested_1:?0x007fdc8f22a560>
>      # ./spec/requests/static_pages_?spec.rb:7:in `block (3 levels) in 
> <top (required)>'
>
> Also, I couldn't figure out where or how to report rspec bugs; sorry for 
> mailing the list if this isn't the right place to do it.
>
>  - A
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120322/32690d48/attachment.html>

From alexch at gmail.com  Thu Mar 22 21:19:04 2012
From: alexch at gmail.com (Alex Chaffee)
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] bug: rspec rails generator generates a failing spec
Message-ID: <16351794.73.1332451144960.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbbpk10>

Using rspec 2.9.0, rspec-rails 2.9.0, rails 3.2.2, following Michael 
Hartl's RailsTutorial, version 3.2, chapter 3.

Running 
  rails generate integration_test static_pages
makes a spec named static_pages_spec.rb that contains the following code
  get static_pages_index_path
which causes this error when run
  
  1) StaticPages GET /static_pages works! (now write some real specs)
     Failure/Error: get static_pages_index_path
     NameError:
       undefined local variable or method `static_pages_index_path' for 
#<RSpec::Core::ExampleGroup::Nested_3::Nested_1:0x007fdc8f22a560>
     # ./spec/requests/static_pages_spec.rb:7:in `block (3 levels) in <top 
(required)>'

Also, I couldn't figure out where or how to report rspec bugs; sorry for 
mailing the list if this isn't the right place to do it.

 - A

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120322/6f6370fd/attachment.html>

From josh at resumecompanion.com  Fri Mar 23 08:34:17 2012
From: josh at resumecompanion.com (Josh Moore)
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 16:34:17 +0800
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-rails does execute any tests
Message-ID: <2C412947-EC45-471C-A362-70350D08FCD6@resumecompanion.com>

I  have inherited a rails 2.3.14 application with no tests. I have gotten cucumber working but when I try to user rspec will not run any of the test cases. These are the first four lines in myspec/spec_helper.rb.

ENV["RAILS_ENV"] ||= 'test'
require File.expand_path(File.join(File.dirname(__FILE__),'..','config','environment'))
require 'spec/autorun'
require 'spec/rails'
When I run bundle exec rake spec it does not have any test cases. But, when I remove require 'spec/rails' it runs correctly and the test cases are executed. I have looked at all the code and even started digging into the rspec-rails gem (rspec-rails 1.3.4 and rspec 1.3.2) but have not found anything. Any ideas of what might be going wrong when rspec-rails is used?

Josh Moore
resumecompanion.com
josh at resumecompanion.com



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120323/81d41f67/attachment.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Fri Mar 23 12:25:13 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 07:25:13 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] rspec-rails does execute any tests
In-Reply-To: <2C412947-EC45-471C-A362-70350D08FCD6@resumecompanion.com>
References: <2C412947-EC45-471C-A362-70350D08FCD6@resumecompanion.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWRxFBR_VY5pzzhePhMj0GcJEvbR4zuSqB-XVezQv2_YAA@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Josh Moore <josh at resumecompanion.com> wrote:
> I??have inherited a rails 2.3.14 application with no tests. I have gotten
> cucumber working but when I try to user rspec will not run any of the test
> cases. These are the first four lines in myspec/spec_helper.rb.
>
> ENV["RAILS_ENV"] ||= 'test'
> require
> File.expand_path(File.join(File.dirname(__FILE__),'..','config','environment'))
> require 'spec/autorun'
> require 'spec/rails'
>
> When I run?bundle exec rake spec?it does not have any test cases. But, when
> I remove?require 'spec/rails'?it runs correctly and the test cases are
> executed. I have looked at all the code and even started digging into the
> rspec-rails gem (rspec-rails 1.3.4 and rspec 1.3.2) but have not found
> anything. Any ideas of what might be going wrong when rspec-rails is used?

What's in the Gemfile?

From anexiole at gmail.com  Mon Mar 26 10:58:39 2012
From: anexiole at gmail.com (Gordon Yeong)
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 21:58:39 +1100
Subject: [rspec-users] 'new' method works as expected but rspec does not
 recognise flash contents or redirection
In-Reply-To: <c9498731-4005-4fc5-8c64-766d2d4f1c3a@pg2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
References: <c9498731-4005-4fc5-8c64-766d2d4f1c3a@pg2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
Message-ID: <CAEoBQ95sDqqKYB9nDAFzemjdpeD9be44z++4qC0At=XxwF2qyw@mail.gmail.com>

Guys,

  Not sure why but I deleted my Gemfile.lock file.  Found that it's due to
a stale Gemfile.lock file which is still using rspec-core 2.8.0 when in
fact I just performed and update yesterday night on rspec (hence I've got
rspec-core 2.9.0).
  Ran "rspec parts_controller.spec.rb" again and all tests are passing.

 Could it really be the stale Gemfile.lock file? hmmm


On 26 March 2012 21:47, Gordon <anexiole at gmail.com> wrote:

> hi all :)
>
>  Found a spec failing today.
> Not sure why.
>
>  When I run my application and successfully added a new object, i can
> see
> 1) a redirection has taken place to the index page as expected (302
> code returned) from the console
> 2) the flash notice's message being displayed in the index page
>
> BUT
> when I run the specs (see below), it fails indicating that the
> redirection did not occur (as a 200 code was returned) AND
> that the flash notice message was nil.
>
>
> ---------specs error start -------------------------------------
>
>  1) PartsController saves the new part object successfully sets the
> flash with a success message
>     Failure/Error: flash[:notice].should eq('Part was successfully
> created.')
>
>       expected: "Part was successfully created."
>            got: nil
>
>       (compared using ==)
>     # ./spec/controllers/parts_controller_spec.rb:35:in `block (3
> levels) in <top (required)>'
>
>  2) PartsController saves the new part object successfully redirects
> the user back to the parts index page
>     Failure/Error: response.should redirect_to( :action => 'index' )
>       Expected response to be a <:redirect>, but was <200>
>     # ./spec/controllers/parts_controller_spec.rb:39:in `block (3
> levels) in <top (required)>'
>
> --------- specs error end   -------------------------------------
>
> --------- extract of spec/controllers/parts_controller_spec.rb - start
> ------------------
>
>  context 'saves the new part object successfully' do
>        before(:each) do
>            post :create, :part => { 'title' => 'HKS boost
> controller' }
>        end
>
>        # we could combine the 2 specs below to save on the post
> request
>        # to the create action but having 2 separate specs would give
>        # clarity
>        it 'sets the flash with a success message' do
>            flash[:notice].should eq('Part was successfully created.')
>        end
>
>        it 'redirects the user back to the parts index page' do
>            response.should redirect_to( :action => 'index' )
>        end
>    end
>
> --------- extract of spec/controllers/parts_controller_spec.rb - end
> ------------------
>
>
> I'm not sure what's going on :(
>
>
>
>
> --------  "parts_controller.rb" - start
> -------------------------------
>
>  # POST /parts
>  # POST /parts.xml
>  def create
>    # Record current user's id as he/she created the part
>    params[:part][:created_by] = current_user.id
>    params[:part][:updated_by] = current_user.id
>
>    @part = Part.new(params[:part])
>    respond_to do |format|
>        if @part.save
>            flash[:notice] = 'Part was successfully created.'
>            format.html { redirect_to(parts_path) }
>            format.xml  { render :xml => @part, :status
> => :created, :location => @part }
>            format.json  {
>                @parts = Part.all;
>                render :json => @parts
>            }
>        else
>            format.html { render :action => "new" }
>            format.xml  { render :xml => @part.errors, :status
> => :unprocessable_entity }
>        end
>    end
>  end
>
>
> --------  "parts_controller.rb" - end  -------------------------------
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120326/37c7372a/attachment-0001.html>

From anexiole at gmail.com  Mon Mar 26 10:47:33 2012
From: anexiole at gmail.com (Gordon)
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 03:47:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] 'new' method works as expected but rspec does not
 recognise flash contents or redirection
Message-ID: <c9498731-4005-4fc5-8c64-766d2d4f1c3a@pg2g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>

hi all :)

 Found a spec failing today.
Not sure why.

 When I run my application and successfully added a new object, i can
see
1) a redirection has taken place to the index page as expected (302
code returned) from the console
2) the flash notice's message being displayed in the index page

BUT
when I run the specs (see below), it fails indicating that the
redirection did not occur (as a 200 code was returned) AND
that the flash notice message was nil.


---------specs error start -------------------------------------

  1) PartsController saves the new part object successfully sets the
flash with a success message
     Failure/Error: flash[:notice].should eq('Part was successfully
created.')

       expected: "Part was successfully created."
            got: nil

       (compared using ==)
     # ./spec/controllers/parts_controller_spec.rb:35:in `block (3
levels) in <top (required)>'

  2) PartsController saves the new part object successfully redirects
the user back to the parts index page
     Failure/Error: response.should redirect_to( :action => 'index' )
       Expected response to be a <:redirect>, but was <200>
     # ./spec/controllers/parts_controller_spec.rb:39:in `block (3
levels) in <top (required)>'

--------- specs error end   -------------------------------------

--------- extract of spec/controllers/parts_controller_spec.rb - start
------------------

  context 'saves the new part object successfully' do
        before(:each) do
            post :create, :part => { 'title' => 'HKS boost
controller' }
        end

        # we could combine the 2 specs below to save on the post
request
        # to the create action but having 2 separate specs would give
        # clarity
        it 'sets the flash with a success message' do
            flash[:notice].should eq('Part was successfully created.')
        end

        it 'redirects the user back to the parts index page' do
            response.should redirect_to( :action => 'index' )
        end
    end

--------- extract of spec/controllers/parts_controller_spec.rb - end
------------------


I'm not sure what's going on :(




--------  "parts_controller.rb" - start
-------------------------------

  # POST /parts
  # POST /parts.xml
  def create
    # Record current user's id as he/she created the part
    params[:part][:created_by] = current_user.id
    params[:part][:updated_by] = current_user.id

    @part = Part.new(params[:part])
    respond_to do |format|
        if @part.save
            flash[:notice] = 'Part was successfully created.'
            format.html { redirect_to(parts_path) }
            format.xml  { render :xml => @part, :status
=> :created, :location => @part }
            format.json  {
                @parts = Part.all;
                render :json => @parts
            }
        else
            format.html { render :action => "new" }
            format.xml  { render :xml => @part.errors, :status
=> :unprocessable_entity }
        end
    end
  end


--------  "parts_controller.rb" - end  -------------------------------


From pcasaretto at gmail.com  Tue Mar 27 00:20:33 2012
From: pcasaretto at gmail.com (Paulo Luis Franchini Casaretto)
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 17:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] [rspec-rails] Mailer tests should be similar to
	Controller tests
Message-ID: <9862337.609.1332807633683.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfw10>



Hey,

When I'm testing a controller, I basically test three things.
Does it assign the variables the view needs?
Does it render the right template?
Does it do whatever the action is supposed to do?
And when testing mailers I feel it should be basically the same.
Does it assign the variables the view needs?
Does it render the right template?
Does it set the right headers?
I don't want to test the actual mail object, the same way I don't want to 
test the views in controller tests.
On the other hand, the mail object IS the output of the mailer, so I don't 
know.
What do you guys think about this?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120326/fa23c73d/attachment.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Tue Mar 27 03:27:20 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 22:27:20 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Rspec not loading fixtures
In-Reply-To: <9fcec270cb5b38b104c8532622639982@ruby-forum.com>
References: <9fcec270cb5b38b104c8532622639982@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWSo7vsrpUD0wKn+A_qgjQG=52Kea2ysw0eRrrpoNVOhrA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Pito Salas <lists at ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> I am taking over a code base and am trying to run the tests. I am
> somewhat new to RSpec so this might be a trivial problem.
>
> Basically I can tell that the fixtures are not getting loaded. All 100
> tests fail with a similar error.
>
> But I don't know why. ?Below is the code, with my narrative with ***
> before it... Can you see anything or give me a clue where to look. So
> far I am coming up empty...
>
> Thanks!
>
> Pito Salas
>
> **** In spec_helper.rb, which I know is running, I see:
>
> Spec::Runner.configure do |config|
> ?config.global_fixtures = :all
> end
>
> **** One of the tests in spec/controllers/downloads_controller_spec.rb
> is below. I know it is running and I know that before the 'describe',
> Partner.count == 0, so no fixture.
>
> require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + '/../spec_helper')
>
> describe DownloadsController do
> ?integrate_views
>
> ?describe "when PDF is ready" do
> ? ?before(:each) do
> ? ? ?@registrant = Factory.create(:step_5_registrant)
> ? ? ?stub(@registrant).merge_pdf { `touch #{@registrant.pdf_file_path}`
> }
> ? ? ?@registrant.generate_pdf
> ? ? ?@registrant.save!
> ? ?end
>
> ? ?it "provides a link to download the PDF" do
> ? ? ?get :show, :registrant_id => @registrant.to_param
> ? ? ?assert_not_nil assigns[:registrant]
> ? ? ?assert_response :success
> ? ? ?assert_template "show"
> ? ? ?assert_select "span.button a[target=_blank]"
> ? ? ?assert_select "span.button a[onclick]"
> ? ?end
>
> ? ?after(:each) do
> ? ? ?`rm #{@registrant.pdf_file_path}`
> ? ?end
> ?end
>
> **** And here is what in various directories:
>
> spec/fixtures/partners.yml - which contains 2 yaml records:
>
> sponsor:
> ?id: 1
> ?username: rtv
> ?email: rocky at example.com
> ?crypted_password:
> "c8e5b51b237344fe0e72539af0cac7197f094a5e933ffacf6e7fa612363c5933f520710c6427ac31fc4c68a2d7bb48eae601c74b96e7838f9ca1a0740b67576a"
> ?password_salt: "Y4PPzYx2ert3vC0OhEMo"
> ?name: Rocky
> ?organization: Rock The Vote
> ?url: http://rockthevote.com
> ?address: 123 Wherever
> ?city: Washington
> ?state_id: 9
> ?zip_code: 20001
> ?phone: 555-555-1234
> ?survey_question_1_en: "What school did you go to?"
> ?survey_question_2_en: "What is your favorite musical group?"
> ?created_at: <%= Time.now %>
> ?updated_at: <%= Time.now %>
> # TODO: remove partner 2 in production
> partner:
> ?id: 2
> ?username: bull_winkle
> ?email: bull_winkle at example.com
> ?crypted_password:
> "c8e5b51b237344fe0e72539af0cac7197f094a5e933ffacf6e7fa612363c5933f520710c6427ac31fc4c68a2d7bb48eae601c74b96e7838f9ca1a0740b67576a"
> ?password_salt: "Y4PPzYx2ert3vC0OhEMo"
> ?name: Bullwinkle
> ?organization: Bullwinkle, Inc.
> ?url: http://example.com
> ?address: 123 Wherever
> ?city: Washington
> ?state_id: 9
> ?zip_code: 20001
> ?phone: 555-555-1234
> ?survey_question_1_en: "What school did you go to?"
> ?survey_question_2_en: "What is your favorite musical group?"
> ?created_at: <%= Time.now %>
> ?updated_at: <%= Time.now %>


What's the actual failure/error message you're seeing? Also, what
happens when you set `fixtures :users` directly in one of the example
groups e.g.

describe DownloadsController do
  integrate_views
  fixtures :users

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Tue Mar 27 08:40:06 2012
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Andreas Plath)
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:40:06 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] Sufficiently tested?
In-Reply-To: <e67505078fa1d60e6fc97c1805eb48e7@ruby-forum.com>
References: <e67505078fa1d60e6fc97c1805eb48e7@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <9c67556a1f976c14abffe43a74c8ec95@ruby-forum.com>

Dear Ulf,

in your fizzbuzz example a kind of simple algorithm is used (% 3 and % 
5) which can be easily tested in a loop. If this loop is clearly 
predictable, a test with only three levels like 3, 6, 9 is enough in my 
opinion.

To extend the test from 1 to 100 in this case is a bit to much. Assuming 
there are exceptions in fizzbuzz like 60 should not be "Fizzbuzz" and 89 
should not be "Fizz" your loop would fail. My point is not that your 
loop fails. My point is You have to create a new algorithm for your 
loop, taking care of the exceptions for 60 and 89.

Keeping the thought of a loop including a special algorithm, one might 
be tempted to extend the loop from 100 to lets say 1000 or even more.

I think loops an algorithms in tests can be used if they are aware of 
expectations and still valid, if they can be extended. Special scenarios 
like days in a month have no values > 31, so there is no reason, to 
extend a loop for days of a month to more than 31. Days in a month is 
commonly known thing. But other types of information can of course be 
mor exceptional, like 0 kelvin = -273.15 degrees Celsius and an 
algorithm testing a colder temperature would be some how out of scope.

So when an algorithm is with out exceptions valid and easily 
predictable, testing of three values should be fine.

Cheers,

Andreas

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From mmazur at gmail.com  Tue Mar 27 14:10:17 2012
From: mmazur at gmail.com (Mike Mazur)
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 22:10:17 +0800
Subject: [rspec-users] Why stop using mock_model in scaffold controller spec?
Message-ID: <CADYkP0m1o6PVT98suAgnHNL9RZRNJrm+A-nGqEFmy+3fyw_Tqw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

In May last year, the controller specs generated with `rspec g
scaffold` were changed to use real model objects instead of
`mock_model`[1].

I'm curious why this change was made? Searching the rspec-users
mailing list archives didn't turn up anything, and rspec-devel
archives I found finish in Februrary 2011[2].

Thanks,
Mike


[1]: https://github.com/rspec/rspec-rails/commit/daef552453e89616e2762e87c0a77dc9b08a2220
[2]: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-devel/

From mmazur at gmail.com  Tue Mar 27 14:24:28 2012
From: mmazur at gmail.com (Mike Mazur)
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 22:24:28 +0800
Subject: [rspec-users] Why stop using mock_model in scaffold controller
	spec?
In-Reply-To: <CADYkP0m1o6PVT98suAgnHNL9RZRNJrm+A-nGqEFmy+3fyw_Tqw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADYkP0m1o6PVT98suAgnHNL9RZRNJrm+A-nGqEFmy+3fyw_Tqw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CADYkP0nZOpwqTWu7SNDVexiceB6GQDKz2OyQgn0Zq9HqRjcPFA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 22:10, Mike Mazur <mmazur at gmail.com> wrote:
> In May last year, the controller specs generated with `rspec g
> scaffold` were changed to use real model objects instead of
> `mock_model`.
>
> I'm curious why this change was made?

As soon I sent this email off, I noticed this text in the template:

# Compared to earlier versions of this generator, there is very limited use of
# stubs and message expectations in this spec.  Stubs are only used when there
# is no simpler way to get a handle on the object needed for the example.
# Message expectations are only used when there is no simpler way to specify
# that an instance is receiving a specific message.

That explains things a bit, but I'm still curious!

One might argue that the earlier approach (with `mock_model`) may be
better for at least two reasons:

- looser coupling between specs and models
- faster spec execution (ie: don't have to create a real ActiveRecord instance)

I imagine RSpec is treading the fine line between ideal "best
practices" (ie: minimize coupling) and being more pragmatic and easier
to understand by the average developer. What's the current thinking on
this topic?

Thanks,
Mike

From weimar1927 at gmail.com  Wed Mar 28 22:11:00 2012
From: weimar1927 at gmail.com (Hillary Hueter)
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:11:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] validating if a cell has any of the options.
Message-ID: <943003.858.1332972660870.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuc18>

I'm testing the filter on a table. One of the filter options is "Show All". 
So for my other tests I've been looping through the rows and seeing if the 
table cell that contains the status doesn't include text (cell.should_not 
== 'Active').

However when the filter is set to all it can include any of the three 
statuses (Active, Inactive, Deleted). 

Using any of the rspec matchers how can I validate this? 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120328/e1a79035/attachment.html>

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Mar 29 11:39:35 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 06:39:35 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] Why stop using mock_model in scaffold controller
	spec?
In-Reply-To: <CADYkP0nZOpwqTWu7SNDVexiceB6GQDKz2OyQgn0Zq9HqRjcPFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADYkP0m1o6PVT98suAgnHNL9RZRNJrm+A-nGqEFmy+3fyw_Tqw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADYkP0nZOpwqTWu7SNDVexiceB6GQDKz2OyQgn0Zq9HqRjcPFA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWRYoed6mGjhFLrRfd6Mf-8iNgoWm19f4HTXcP2bW2V_hg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Mike Mazur <mmazur at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 22:10, Mike Mazur <mmazur at gmail.com> wrote:
>> In May last year, the controller specs generated with `rspec g
>> scaffold` were changed to use real model objects instead of
>> `mock_model`.
>>
>> I'm curious why this change was made?
>
> As soon I sent this email off, I noticed this text in the template:
>
> # Compared to earlier versions of this generator, there is very limited use of
> # stubs and message expectations in this spec. ?Stubs are only used when there
> # is no simpler way to get a handle on the object needed for the example.
> # Message expectations are only used when there is no simpler way to specify
> # that an instance is receiving a specific message.
>
> That explains things a bit, but I'm still curious!
>
> One might argue that the earlier approach (with `mock_model`) may be
> better for at least two reasons:
>
> - looser coupling between specs and models
> - faster spec execution (ie: don't have to create a real ActiveRecord instance)
>
> I imagine RSpec is treading the fine line between ideal "best
> practices (ie: minimize coupling) and being more pragmatic and easier
> to understand by the average developer. What's the current thinking on
> this topic?

It wasn't really a loose coupling with models, it was a loose coupling
with the underlying data. It was still very tightly coupled to
ActiveRecord APIs (all, find, etc) because the generated controller
code is coupled to those APIs.

In rails-2, you could stub Model.find, and if you added constraints to
find the specs would still pass because you were still using find. In
rails-3, additional constraints are added via ARel APIs, which don't
end up going through find, so you have to change all the specs when
you change the implementation. This created additional friction which
was annoying to people who understood what was going on, and confusing
for people who didn't.

In terms of the speed benefit, I do think that has merit and I stub
model APIs all the time, but they are domain-specific APIs, not
ActiveRecord APIs (most of the time). e.g. rather than stubbing
Article.where("date >= ?", Date.today - 1.week) I'll stub
Article.recent and call that from the controller. This, however, is
not something that a generator can do for you since it doesn't know
your domain.

HTH,
David

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Mar 29 11:45:21 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 06:45:21 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] validating if a cell has any of the options.
In-Reply-To: <943003.858.1332972660870.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuc18>
References: <943003.858.1332972660870.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuc18>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWTMLvmEm+hsj5YMARxV6SpeL-kW5x90MDyOXyX2JVNuwg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Hillary Hueter <weimar1927 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm testing the filter on a table. One of the filter options is "Show All".
> So for my other tests I've been looping through the rows and seeing if the
> table cell that contains the status doesn't include text (cell.should_not ==
> 'Active').

Please post one of these examples so we can see precisely what you're
already doing.

Thx,
David

> However when the filter is set to all it can include any of the three
> statuses (Active, Inactive, Deleted).
>
> Using any of the rspec matchers how can I validate this?

From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Thu Mar 29 11:55:57 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 06:55:57 -0500
Subject: [rspec-users] [rspec-rails] Mailer tests should be similar to
 Controller tests
In-Reply-To: <9862337.609.1332807633683.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfw10>
References: <9862337.609.1332807633683.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbbfw10>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWSF3fOrUk9SLhExhdNLBWEoTJwiy+9OzcOsqzW-BCrTPQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 7:20 PM, Paulo Luis Franchini Casaretto
<pcasaretto at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey,
>
> When I'm testing a controller, I basically test three things.
> Does it assign the variables the view needs?
> Does it render the right template?
> Does it do whatever the action is supposed to do?
> And when testing mailers I feel it should be basically the same.
> Does it assign the variables the view needs?
> Does it render the right template?
> Does it set the right headers?
> I don't want to test the actual mail object, the same way I don't want to
> test the views in controller tests.
> On the other hand, the mail object IS the output of the mailer, so I don't
> know.
> What do you guys think about this?

Seems reasonable, but unlikely to change. Here's why. rspec-rails
provides wrappers around test classes provided by rails. Rails
functional tests support the three questions you pose above, but rails
mailer tests are different. From
http://guides.rubyonrails.org/action_mailer_basics.html: "Testing
mailers normally involves two things: One is that the mail was queued,
and the other one that the email is correct."

To support what you'd like to see in mailer specs, rspec-rails would
have to provide it's own ExampleGroup (rather than wrap the rails
class), which would have to be tightly bound to rails' internals. I
took great pains in rspec-rails-2 to constrain coupling to public
APIs, and this has had a big payoff: we've only had one case where a
rails 3.x release required a release of rspec-rails (i.e. there was a
breaking change). With rails-2, pretty much every release broke
rspec-rails because rspec-rails was tied to internals (rspec-rails'
fault, not rails).

If you really want to see this change, you'll need to get it changed
in rails itself, at which point rspec-rails will happily wrap the new
and improved MailerTestCase.

HTH,
David

From weimar1927 at gmail.com  Fri Mar 30 16:52:58 2012
From: weimar1927 at gmail.com (Hillary Hueter)
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 09:52:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [rspec-users] validating if a cell has any of the options.
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWTMLvmEm+hsj5YMARxV6SpeL-kW5x90MDyOXyX2JVNuwg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <943003.858.1332972660870.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuc18>
	<CAKw-oWTMLvmEm+hsj5YMARxV6SpeL-kW5x90MDyOXyX2JVNuwg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4759914.2981.1333126378713.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbdn7>


The example as it exists today: 
   it "should show all applications" do  
      I.new do |c|
      c.login_flow(:userid => $support, :password => $password) ## Logs in
      c.manage_application_page.filter.when_present.flash
      c.manage_application_page.filter.when_present.select_value("All") ## 
Checks that the dropdown exists and changes it to "Show All Applications"
      #Assertion
        c.manage_application_page.applications_table.tr.each do | cell |
              if ["Active", "Inactive", "Deleted"].include? cell.text()
                puts cell.text()
              end
           end
        end
      end

An example of the other tests: 

   it "should show all active applications" do ### Checking the Application 
Filter "Show All Active Applications" is working properly
    Insight.new do |c|
      c.login_flow(:userid => $support, :password => $password) ## Logs in
      c.manage_application_page.filter.when_present.flash
      
c.manage_application_page.filter.when_present.select_value("AllActive") ## 
Checks that the dropdown exists and changes it to "Show All Active 
Applications"
      #Assertion
        c.manage_application_page.applications_table.tr.each do |cell|
            cell.text.should_not == 'Deleted'
            cell.text.should_not == 'Inactive'
        end
    end 
  end 




On Thursday, March 29, 2012 4:45:21 AM UTC-7, dchel... at gmail.com wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Hillary Hueter <weimar1927 at gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> > I'm testing the filter on a table. One of the filter options is "Show 
> All".
> > So for my other tests I've been looping through the rows and seeing if 
> the
> > table cell that contains the status doesn't include text 
> (cell.should_not ==
> > 'Active').
>
> Please post one of these examples so we can see precisely what you're
> already doing.
>
> Thx,
> David
>
> > However when the filter is set to all it can include any of the three
> > statuses (Active, Inactive, Deleted).
> >
> > Using any of the rspec matchers how can I validate this?
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120330/b15a5e72/attachment.html>

From jko170 at gmail.com  Sat Mar 31 00:30:28 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 18:30:28 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] validating if a cell has any of the options.
In-Reply-To: <4759914.2981.1333126378713.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbdn7>
References: <943003.858.1332972660870.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbuc18>
	<CAKw-oWTMLvmEm+hsj5YMARxV6SpeL-kW5x90MDyOXyX2JVNuwg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4759914.2981.1333126378713.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbdn7>
Message-ID: <5D1F243B-B51F-43E1-B8CE-8E011BB258C9@gmail.com>


On Mar 30, 2012, at 10:52 AM, Hillary Hueter wrote:

> 
> The example as it exists today: 
>    it "should show all applications" do  
>       I.new do |c|
>       c.login_flow(:userid => $support, :password => $password) ## Logs in
>       c.manage_application_page.filter.when_present.flash
>       c.manage_application_page.filter.when_present.select_value("All") ## Checks that the dropdown exists and changes it to "Show All Applications"
>       #Assertion
>         c.manage_application_page.applications_table.tr.each do | cell |
>               if ["Active", "Inactive", "Deleted"].include? cell.text()
>                 puts cell.text()
>               end
>            end
>         end
>       end
> 
> An example of the other tests: 
> 
>    it "should show all active applications" do ### Checking the Application Filter "Show All Active Applications" is working properly
>     Insight.new do |c|
>       c.login_flow(:userid => $support, :password => $password) ## Logs in
>       c.manage_application_page.filter.when_present.flash
>       c.manage_application_page.filter.when_present.select_value("AllActive") ## Checks that the dropdown exists and changes it to "Show All Active Applications"
>       #Assertion
>         c.manage_application_page.applications_table.tr.each do |cell|
>             cell.text.should_not == 'Deleted'
>             cell.text.should_not == 'Inactive'
>         end
>     end 
>   end 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Thursday, March 29, 2012 4:45:21 AM UTC-7, dchel... at gmail.com wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Hillary Hueter <weimar1927 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm testing the filter on a table. One of the filter options is "Show All".
> > So for my other tests I've been looping through the rows and seeing if the
> > table cell that contains the status doesn't include text (cell.should_not ==
> > 'Active').
> Please post one of these examples so we can see precisely what you're
> already doing.
> 
> Thx,
> David
> 
> > However when the filter is set to all it can include any of the three
> > statuses (Active, Inactive, Deleted).
> >
> > Using any of the rspec matchers how can I validate this?
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

If you're trying to verify that a string can be *any* of some things, I would go with something like this:

"foo".should match Regexp.union('Active', 'Inactive', 'Deleted')

That is the same as:

"foo".should match /Active|Inactive|Deleted/


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20120330/58bac11d/attachment.html>

From lists at ruby-forum.com  Sat Mar 31 05:11:45 2012
From: lists at ruby-forum.com (Fearless Fool)
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 07:11:45 +0200
Subject: [rspec-users] isolating controller tests from models
Message-ID: <8ea0eacb72c553e0d1af4de20a0c0f54@ruby-forum.com>

This is a rehash of a question I posed at:
  http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9952317/isolating-controller-tests-from-models
The basic question: If I have a FoosController and a Foo model, can I
run FoosController rspec tests without creating the foos database table?
I haven't found a good way to avoid it.

Consider this simple controller:

    # file: app/controllers/foos_controller.rb
    class FoosController < ApplicationController
      respond_to :json
      def create
        @foo = Foo.create(params[:foo])
        respond_with @foo
      end
    end

In my RSpec tests, I can do

    @foo = mock_model("Foo")
    Foo.stub(:create) { @foo }
    post :create, :format => :json

... but that fails in the call to respond_with @foo, because
ActionController calls @foo.has_errors? which in turn hits the database
to look up column names.  I could stub out has_errors?, but that means
that I'm reaching into the internals of the system -- probably not a
good idea for a test suite.

If the answer to my question "can I do controller testing without
creating the underlying database tables?" is 'no', then I'll accept that
(with regret).  But I'd rather hear that it is somehow possible.

- ff

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

From jko170 at gmail.com  Sat Mar 31 05:49:03 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 23:49:03 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] isolating controller tests from models
In-Reply-To: <8ea0eacb72c553e0d1af4de20a0c0f54@ruby-forum.com>
References: <8ea0eacb72c553e0d1af4de20a0c0f54@ruby-forum.com>
Message-ID: <69083A1F-86E1-474A-AE66-2DB7832FE4D4@gmail.com>


On Mar 30, 2012, at 11:11 PM, Fearless Fool wrote:

> This is a rehash of a question I posed at:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9952317/isolating-controller-tests-from-models
> The basic question: If I have a FoosController and a Foo model, can I
> run FoosController rspec tests without creating the foos database table?
> I haven't found a good way to avoid it.
> 
> Consider this simple controller:
> 
>   # file: app/controllers/foos_controller.rb
>   class FoosController < ApplicationController
>     respond_to :json
>     def create
>       @foo = Foo.create(params[:foo])
>       respond_with @foo
>     end
>   end
> 
> In my RSpec tests, I can do
> 
>   @foo = mock_model("Foo")
>   Foo.stub(:create) { @foo }
>   post :create, :format => :json
> 
> ... but that fails in the call to respond_with @foo, because
> ActionController calls @foo.has_errors? which in turn hits the database
> to look up column names.  I could stub out has_errors?, but that means
> that I'm reaching into the internals of the system -- probably not a
> good idea for a test suite.

Oh, the irony!

You're using rspec-rails, which reaches *much further* into the "system" than `has_errors?`.

Mucking with a non-public API is not a "never ever" thing :)

> 
> If the answer to my question "can I do controller testing without
> creating the underlying database tables?" is 'no', then I'll accept that
> (with regret).  But I'd rather hear that it is somehow possible.
> 
> - ff
> 
> -- 
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users


From dchelimsky at gmail.com  Sat Mar 31 11:50:27 2012
From: dchelimsky at gmail.com (David Chelimsky)
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 08:50:27 -0300
Subject: [rspec-users] isolating controller tests from models
In-Reply-To: <69083A1F-86E1-474A-AE66-2DB7832FE4D4@gmail.com>
References: <8ea0eacb72c553e0d1af4de20a0c0f54@ruby-forum.com>
	<69083A1F-86E1-474A-AE66-2DB7832FE4D4@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKw-oWRg9Uj-++p-47_EBdzW_9_hH0fTdV+U2Z+-bdink5ga-Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Justin Ko <jko170 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 30, 2012, at 11:11 PM, Fearless Fool wrote:
>
>> This is a rehash of a question I posed at:
>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9952317/isolating-controller-tests-from-models
>> The basic question: If I have a FoosController and a Foo model, can I
>> run FoosController rspec tests without creating the foos database table?
>> I haven't found a good way to avoid it.
>>
>> Consider this simple controller:
>>
>> ? # file: app/controllers/foos_controller.rb
>> ? class FoosController < ApplicationController
>> ? ? respond_to :json
>> ? ? def create
>> ? ? ? @foo = Foo.create(params[:foo])
>> ? ? ? respond_with @foo
>> ? ? end
>> ? end
>>
>> In my RSpec tests, I can do
>>
>> ? @foo = mock_model("Foo")
>> ? Foo.stub(:create) { @foo }
>> ? post :create, :format => :json
>>
>> ... but that fails in the call to respond_with @foo, because
>> ActionController calls @foo.has_errors? which in turn hits the database
>> to look up column names.

mock_model is not an ActiveRecord object, so if it's hitting the db
then something's not wired up correctly.

> I could stub out has_errors?, but that means
>> that I'm reaching into the internals of the system -- probably not a
>> good idea for a test suite.
>
> Oh, the irony!
>
> You're using rspec-rails, which reaches *much further* into the "system" than `has_errors?`.

There's a difference between a library doing this and end-user specs
doing this. They both bear risk, but the burden is on the library
developer (and in one place) if it's the lib, whereas its on all end
users who stray on their own.

> Mucking with a non-public API is not a "never ever" thing :)

Care to elaborate on what the risks are and when you think it's worth it?

>> If the answer to my question "can I do controller testing without
>> creating the underlying database tables?" is 'no', then I'll accept that
>> (with regret). ?But I'd rather hear that it is somehow possible.

Of course its possible - just a matter of whether its worth it. This
relates to an earlier question which I believe you posted about why
the generated controller specs changed for rails 3. respond_with is
another addition to rails 3 that tightly couples controllers to
models, making it more challenging to stub models in controller specs.
If you're going to violate the "mock your code, not other people's"
guideline, you might find it safer to do it at a higher level of
abstraction: mock respond_with directly on the controller. Still a
violation of stub/mock guidelines, but at least it deals with code
that you can see and change in the controller.

HTH,
David

From jko170 at gmail.com  Sat Mar 31 23:38:13 2012
From: jko170 at gmail.com (Justin Ko)
Date: Sat, 31 Mar 2012 17:38:13 -0600
Subject: [rspec-users] isolating controller tests from models
In-Reply-To: <CAKw-oWRg9Uj-++p-47_EBdzW_9_hH0fTdV+U2Z+-bdink5ga-Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8ea0eacb72c553e0d1af4de20a0c0f54@ruby-forum.com>
	<69083A1F-86E1-474A-AE66-2DB7832FE4D4@gmail.com>
	<CAKw-oWRg9Uj-++p-47_EBdzW_9_hH0fTdV+U2Z+-bdink5ga-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A84AAA6-28EE-4FA8-97D3-3AFC2B1D1C88@gmail.com>



Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 31, 2012, at 5:50 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Justin Ko <jko170 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> On Mar 30, 2012, at 11:11 PM, Fearless Fool wrote:
>> 
>>> This is a rehash of a question I posed at:
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9952317/isolating-controller-tests-from-models
>>> The basic question: If I have a FoosController and a Foo model, can I
>>> run FoosController rspec tests without creating the foos database table?
>>> I haven't found a good way to avoid it.
>>> 
>>> Consider this simple controller:
>>> 
>>>   # file: app/controllers/foos_controller.rb
>>>   class FoosController < ApplicationController
>>>     respond_to :json
>>>     def create
>>>       @foo = Foo.create(params[:foo])
>>>       respond_with @foo
>>>     end
>>>   end
>>> 
>>> In my RSpec tests, I can do
>>> 
>>>   @foo = mock_model("Foo")
>>>   Foo.stub(:create) { @foo }
>>>   post :create, :format => :json
>>> 
>>> ... but that fails in the call to respond_with @foo, because
>>> ActionController calls @foo.has_errors? which in turn hits the database
>>> to look up column names.
> 
> mock_model is not an ActiveRecord object, so if it's hitting the db
> then something's not wired up correctly.
> 
>> I could stub out has_errors?, but that means
>>> that I'm reaching into the internals of the system -- probably not a
>>> good idea for a test suite.
>> 
>> Oh, the irony!
>> 
>> You're using rspec-rails, which reaches *much further* into the "system" than `has_errors?`.
> 
> There's a difference between a library doing this and end-user specs
> doing this. They both bear risk, but the burden is on the library
> developer (and in one place) if it's the lib, whereas its on all end
> users who stray on their own.
> 
>> Mucking with a non-public API is not a "never ever" thing :)
> 
> Care to elaborate on what the risks are and when you think it's worth it?

The risk is you might be changing the behaviour of rails, which means you're not testing the true behaviour of the system. That goes with the public API too, but you're less likely to screw that up, and is less brittle.

In this case, if there is no way around mocking 'has_errors?', I think it's worth the benefit of not hitting the database. I wouldn't go past mocking more than one very simple internal method, that's just asking for trouble.

It's all about trade offs, right?

> 
>>> If the answer to my question "can I do controller testing without
>>> creating the underlying database tables?" is 'no', then I'll accept that
>>> (with regret).  But I'd rather hear that it is somehow possible.
> 
> Of course its possible - just a matter of whether its worth it. This
> relates to an earlier question which I believe you posted about why
> the generated controller specs changed for rails 3. respond_with is
> another addition to rails 3 that tightly couples controllers to
> models, making it more challenging to stub models in controller specs.
> If you're going to violate the "mock your code, not other people's"
> guideline, you might find it safer to do it at a higher level of
> abstraction: mock respond_with directly on the controller. Still a
> violation of stub/mock guidelines, but at least it deals with code
> that you can see and change in the controller.

OP, since you basically need to load the rails env for controller specs, I dont see a problem with hitting the DB to check columns. Usually, the downside to hitting the DB is performance, but as long as you're not querying/creating/deleting records there's no downside to it IMO.

> 
> HTH,
> David
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users