Rails - Dec 2006 - Unit testing validates_associated and HABTM relationships

I''m trying to set up some unit tests and they are failing on just
basic tests on one model.

The failure is:

1) Failure:
test_invalid_with_empty_attributes(WorkAreaTaskTest)
[test/unit/work_area_task_test.rb:15]:
<false> is not true.

My model is:

class WorkAreaTask < ActiveRecord::Base

  belongs_to :task
  belongs_to :work_area
  has_many :employee_tasks, :dependent => :destroy

  acts_as_list :scope => :work_area

  validates_presence_of :task_id
  validates_presence_of :work_area_id

  validates_presence_of :task
  validates_associated :task

end

And my unit test is:

class WorkAreaTaskTest < Test::Unit::TestCase
  fixtures :work_area_tasks, :employee_type_tasks, :tasks, :work_areas

  # Replace this with your real tests.
  def test_truth
    assert true
  end

  def test_invalid_with_empty_attributes
     work_area_task = WorkAreaTask.new

     assert !work_area_task.valid?
     assert work_area_task.errors.invalid?(:task_id)
     assert work_area_task.errors.invalid?(:work_area_id)
     assert work_area_task.errors.invalid?(:task)
   end
end


The failure occurs at the assert invalid tests.

-- 
Sterling Anderson
sterling [at] sterlinganderson.net
http://sterlinganderson.net/

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Can''t tell from your posting which line is line 15. Where exactly is it
failing?

On 12/4/06, Sterling Anderson
<sterling-m5t3XAY/qu5DjbiTPaivd+TW4wlIGRCZ@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> I''m trying to set up some unit tests and they are failing on just
> basic tests on one model.
>
> The failure is:
>
> 1) Failure:
> test_invalid_with_empty_attributes(WorkAreaTaskTest)
> [test/unit/work_area_task_test.rb:15]:
> <false> is not true.
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

It''s failing on this line:

assert work_area_task.errors.invalid?(:task_id)

The only way to get it to not fail is to comment that line and the
next 2 as well. So it''s like is getting the the IDs and the task from
somewhere, because they should be empty.

On 12/4/06, Bala Paranj <bcparanj-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> Can''t tell from your posting which line is line 15. Where exactly
is it
> failing?
>
>
> On 12/4/06, Sterling Anderson
<sterling-m5t3XAY/qu5DjbiTPaivd+TW4wlIGRCZ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > I''m trying to set up some unit tests and they are failing on
just
> > basic tests on one model.
> >
> > The failure is:
> >
> > 1) Failure:
> > test_invalid_with_empty_attributes(WorkAreaTaskTest)
> > [test/unit/work_area_task_test.rb:15]:
> > <false> is not true.
> >
>
>  >
>

-- 
Sterling Anderson
sterling [at] sterlinganderson.net
http://sterlinganderson.net/
608.239.8387

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

I don''t know why you are checking the id''s. The id''s
are usually keys that
are generated automatically when you save the model. Is there any reason why
you are validating id''s?

If you cannot save the model, the id fields will be blank.


On 12/4/06, Sterling Anderson
<sterling-m5t3XAY/qu5DjbiTPaivd+TW4wlIGRCZ@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> It''s failing on this line:
>
> assert work_area_task.errors.invalid?(:task_id)
>
> The only way to get it to not fail is to comment that line and the
> next 2 as well. So it''s like is getting the the IDs and the task
from
> somewhere, because they should be empty.
>
>
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

I''m not checking the id''s from the model I am testing. I am
checking
the foreign key id''s, ie. the id''s from the related tables
that need
to be there for the model to be valid. That''s why I am checking for
them.

On 12/4/06, Bala Paranj <bcparanj-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> I don''t know why you are checking the id''s. The
id''s are usually keys that
> are generated automatically when you save the model. Is there any reason
why
> you are validating id''s?
>
> If you cannot save the model, the id fields will be blank.
>
>
> On 12/4/06, Sterling Anderson
<sterling-m5t3XAY/qu5DjbiTPaivd+TW4wlIGRCZ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > It''s failing on this line:
> >
> > assert work_area_task.errors.invalid?(:task_id)
> >
> > The only way to get it to not fail is to comment that line and the
> > next 2 as well. So it''s like is getting the the IDs and the
task from
> > somewhere, because they should be empty.
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>  >
>

-- 
Sterling Anderson
sterling [at] sterlinganderson.net
http://sterlinganderson.net/
608.239.8387

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Read this first: http://manuals.rubyonrails.com/read/chapter/27

Test the behavior, not the implementation. You don''t have to check the
foreign keys. You can save a valid record and read it back and compare it
with fixture data. It is very similar to the example from the above
tutorial. Remove validates_presence_of :task_id, :work_area_id from your
model class.  I would love to be proved wrong here.

On 12/4/06, Sterling Anderson
<sterling-m5t3XAY/qu5DjbiTPaivd+TW4wlIGRCZ@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> I''m not checking the id''s from the model I am testing. I
am checking
> the foreign key id''s, ie. the id''s from the related
tables that need
> to be there for the model to be valid. That''s why I am checking
for
> them.
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Ahhh. I see what you are saying. Rooky mistake on my part. :-)

So basically the belongs_to is going to take care of the foreign keys,
so there''s no reason for me to have "validates_X_of" for them
is what
you are saying?



On 12/4/06, Bala Paranj <bcparanj-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> Read this first:
> http://manuals.rubyonrails.com/read/chapter/27
>
> Test the behavior, not the implementation. You don''t have to check
the
> foreign keys. You can save a valid record and read it back and compare it
> with fixture data. It is very similar to the example from the above
> tutorial. Remove validates_presence_of :task_id, :work_area_id from your
> model class.  I would love to be proved wrong here.
>
> On 12/4/06, Sterling Anderson
<sterling-m5t3XAY/qu5DjbiTPaivd+TW4wlIGRCZ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > I''m not checking the id''s from the model I am
testing. I am checking
> > the foreign key id''s, ie. the id''s from the related
tables that need
> > to be there for the model to be valid. That''s why I am
checking for
> > them.
> >

-- 
Sterling Anderson
sterling [at] sterlinganderson.net
http://sterlinganderson.net/

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Yes. Also before you start writing tests, jot down specifications in a sheet
of paper. Then write : test_should_your_written_specification_one, two etc.
When you do TDD really well you are actually thinking in terms of behavior.

If you really want to push the envelope and have some time to kill, then
check out rSpec. There is a nice Google video that was presented at Google
about rSpec.

For your viewing pleasure:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8135690990081075324&q=bdd&hl=en

On 12/4/06, Sterling Anderson
<sterling-m5t3XAY/qu5DjbiTPaivd+TW4wlIGRCZ@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> Ahhh. I see what you are saying. Rooky mistake on my part. :-)
>
> So basically the belongs_to is going to take care of the foreign keys,
> so there''s no reason for me to have "validates_X_of" for
them is what
> you are saying?
>
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---