rspec users - Nov 2009 - Model spec for file upload with paperclip and fastercsv

I just started my ImportsController and was this was really the way to
go:

////////import.rb/////////////////

class Import < ActiveRecord::Base
  has_attached_file :csv
  validates_attachment_presence :csv

  after_save :process_csv

  private
  def process_csv
    FasterCSV.foreach( csv.path) do |row|
      #TODO
    end
  end

end

/////////import_spec.rb/////////////////

require ''spec_helper''

describe Import do

  it "should should succeed creating a valid Import from the factory"
do
    import = Factory.build(:import)
   
import.csv.stub!(:url).and_return("#{RAILS_ROOT}/spec/csv/3_products.csv")
    import.save
  end

  describe "handling CSV files" do
    describe "to import products" do

      before(:each) do
        @import = Factory.build(:import)
       
@import.csv.stub!(:url).and_return("#{RAILS_ROOT}/spec/csv/3_products.csv")
      end

      def do_save
        @import.save
      end

      it "should process the csv file after save" do
        @import.should_receive(:process_csv)
        do_save
      end

      it "should load the csv file" do
        FasterCSV.should_receive(:foreach)
        do_save
      end

    end

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

Now I have another weird error. My Products doesn''t save in the specs, 
but it does in cucumber tests and human tests.
I''d be glad if someone could look into this.

http://pastie.org/693611

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

In the example that is failing, "should build 3 new Products" you
have:

      it "should build 3 new Products" do
        # I have to tag this pending, this results in a weird error I
don''t have time for yet
        # full stack testing with cucumber succeeds, human testing does too
        # pending
        Product.should_receive(:new)
        do_save
        Product.count.should == 3
      end

You are setting up an expectation with "should_receive(:new)", and
you''re not supplying anything to be returned so it is defaulting to
nil. This is why you get the NoMethodError calling nil.save... because
your local variable product is nil for the duration of this example.

I don''t think you want to be using mocking down in the model spec like
you are doing. For example, does it really matter that #foreach was
called? Or that Product#new was called? Or that product#save was
called? These can all be inferred if you have a CSV file, save the
import ,and then suddenly you have products. No need to worry about
them directly IMO.

Using mocks in this example happen to make this spec brittle, and it
doesn''t add any value. For example, say you changed from using
fastercsv to some other csv library that had a different API, but it
properly parsed the CSV files. All of the behaviour of importing
products the CSV file still worked, but suddenly your examples fail
because #foreach isn''t be used. When focusing on the Import model
focus on the behaviour you want out of it. Based on the pastie you
made it seems like you want it to import products from a CSV after
save. So, you can write an example for ensuring the right number of
products were created. You might also want to write an example to
ensure the write fields from the CSV ended in the right attributes on
a product. Picking one or two products should be enough to gain
confidence.

I''ve done a quick edit of your original spec to show what I was
thinking when I quickly read your spec: http://pastie.org/693775

Hopefully this helps!



On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Ray K. <lists at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> Now I have another weird error. My Products doesn''t save in the
specs,
> but it does in cucumber tests and human tests.
> I''d be glad if someone could look into this.
>
> http://pastie.org/693611
>
> Ray
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>


-- 
Zach Dennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com (personal)
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com (hire me)
http://ideafoundry.info/behavior-driven-development (first rate BDD training)
@zachdennis (twitter)

Thanks for your input, I will try that later.

The reason why I posted here is, that it felt all wrong to spec my model 
like this while writing it. It just wasn''t behavior driven, but 
implementation driven.

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

Here''s a conclusion I''m drawing for myself.

With little prior experience, there''s only so much I could take with me
from one read through the rspec book.
Maybe it''s time to read it again.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.