thr3ads.net - Rails - unit test fails, but shouldnt have [Dec 2008]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Merrick Johnson

2008-Dec-21 04:51 UTC

unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Hi,

I have a one to many relationship ( stories & votes ), that i wish to
test via a unit test. In development everything works great, votes ends
up w/ the correct story_id and the relationship is great ( i can
Vote.find(:last).story or Story.find(:last).votes ) But when I run the
unit test, it fails. The story gets an id of 996332877 ( which is 10000
in dev ) and the votes story_id is 0. Not sure what the heck is going on
here. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Merrick


stories:
+-----------------+
| ID | NAME | URL |
+-----------------+

votes:
+---------------+
| ID | STORY_ID |
+---------------+

models:

class Story < ActiveRecord::Base
  validates_presence_of :name, :link
  has_many :votes do
    def latest
      find :all, :order => ''id DESC'', :limit => 3
    end
  end
  def to_param
    "#{id}-#{name.gsub(/\W/, ''-'').downcase}"
  end
end

class Vote < ActiveRecord::Base
  belongs_to :story
end

vote test:

  test "story_association" do
    assert_equal stories(:two), votes(:two).story #FAILS!
  end
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Phlip

2008-Dec-21 05:18 UTC

head link

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Merrick Johnson wrote:
>   has_many :votes do
>     def latest
>       find :all, :order => ''id DESC'', :limit => 3
>     end
>   end
Nice! Could someone hint what that syntax does? (But I don''t think
it''s causing
the problem...
> vote test:
Next time, write the test first! You should have developed all those model-level
features entirely in test, using the tests essentially the same way - to feel 
around and sense changes as you grew the code - as you used your Rails app in 
development mode.

But enough of the lecture...
>   test "story_association" do
>     assert_equal stories(:two), votes(:two).story #FAILS!
>   end
What is in your test/fixtures/stories.yml and votes.yml files?

What does the assert_equal spew forth when it fails?

-- 
   Phlip
http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2008/05/dynamic_languages_vs_editors.html


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Merrick Johnson

2008-Dec-21 05:21 UTC

head link

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Good call Philip, turns out my votes.yml fixture looked like this:

one:
  story_id: one

two:
  story_id: one

when it should have looked like this:

one:
  story: one

two:
  story: one


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

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Merrick Johnson

2008-Dec-21 05:30 UTC

head link

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Phlip wrote:> Merrick Johnson wrote:
> 
>>   has_many :votes do
>>     def latest
>>       find :all, :order => ''id DESC'', :limit =>
3
>>     end
>>   end
> 
> Nice! Could someone hint what that syntax does? (But I don''t think
it''s
> causing
> the problem...
this creates a method for the resource. in this case it returns the 
newest 3 records. This is pretty helpful because i can call this from a 
view or partial ( @story.votes.latest ) and just get the newest three 
votes. This should work in any DB ( im using Oracle11G )
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Phlip

2008-Dec-21 05:31 UTC

head link

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Merrick Johnson wrote:
> one:
>   story: one
> 
> two:
>   story: one
Ahem. Now for some more lectures!

Your test data fixtures should be literate, so you can document your business 
rules in your test cases. In other words, your fixtures should not just say
"one
two" etc. They should, instead, tell a ... story.

(-:

BTW I guessed what this does:

 >  has_many :votes do
 >     def latest
 >       find :all, :order => ''id DESC'', :limit => 3
 >     end
 >   end

It lets you say a_story.votes.latest and call that find. I can''t wait
to use
that utterly kewl feature!

-- 
   Phlip

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Phlip

2008-Dec-21 05:45 UTC

head link

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Merrick Johnson wrote:
> this creates a method for the resource. in this case it returns the 
> newest 3 records.
Yup!

 > This is pretty helpful because i can call this from
a> view or partial ( @story.votes.latest ) and just get the newest three 
> votes. This should work in any DB ( im using Oracle11G )
And you never need to say that about MVC or ActiveRecord. The point is you write
the minimum code, all in the right places, to support the maximum features. You 
don''t have to do it the old-fashioned way, with code scattered
everywhere, all
very similar, getting in the way of each other!

Now this is why that new aggregation notation is so dang cool. Here''s
the Rails
1 way to do a bunch of links:

   class Customer
     has_many :accounts
     has_many :accounts_cc, :class_name => ''Account'',
                    :conditions => { :kind => ''cc'' }
     has_many :accounts_ach, :class_name => ''Account'',
                    :conditions => { :kind => ''ach'' }
   end

Now compared to raw SQL, has_many is already an order of magnitude more DRY 
(Don''t Repeat Yourself). Yet the one requirement to distinguish Credit
Card from
Checking accounts forces us to create three very wet has_many calls on the same 
model. They are, once again, irritatingly similar.

Here''s the (apparent!) Rails 2 fix:

   class Customer
     has_many :accounts do
       def kind(k)
	find :all, :conditions => { :kind => k }
       end
     end
   end

Boom done. You can write customer.accounts,
customer.accounts.kind(''cc''), and
customer.accounts.kind(''ach''), all very similar to what you
could write before,
but with far fewer executable lines.

I''m stoked because we just spent 3 days refactoring a big system which
needed
this exact fix, and I didn''t know about it. Now I get to install it on
Monday.
Merry Xmas to me, huh?!

-- 
   Phlip

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Merrick Johnson

2008-Dec-21 05:50 UTC

head link

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Phlip wrote:> Merrick Johnson wrote:
> 
>> this creates a method for the resource. in this case it returns the 
>> newest 3 records.
> 
> Yup!
> 
>  > This is pretty helpful because i can call this from a
>> view or partial ( @story.votes.latest ) and just get the newest three 
>> votes. This should work in any DB ( im using Oracle11G )
> 
> And you never need to say that about MVC or ActiveRecord. The point is 
> you write
> the minimum code, all in the right places, to support the maximum 
> features. You
> don''t have to do it the old-fashioned way, with code scattered 
> everywhere, all
> very similar, getting in the way of each other!
> 
> Now this is why that new aggregation notation is so dang cool.
Here''s
> the Rails
> 1 way to do a bunch of links:
> 
>    class Customer
>      has_many :accounts
>      has_many :accounts_cc, :class_name => ''Account'',
>                     :conditions => { :kind => ''cc''
}
>      has_many :accounts_ach, :class_name => ''Account'',
>                     :conditions => { :kind => ''ach''
}
>    end
> 
> Now compared to raw SQL, has_many is already an order of magnitude more 
> DRY
> (Don''t Repeat Yourself). Yet the one requirement to distinguish
Credit
> Card from
> Checking accounts forces us to create three very wet has_many calls on 
> the same
> model. They are, once again, irritatingly similar.
> 
> Here''s the (apparent!) Rails 2 fix:
> 
>    class Customer
>      has_many :accounts do
>        def kind(k)
>   find :all, :conditions => { :kind => k }
>        end
>      end
>    end
> 
> Boom done. You can write customer.accounts, 
> customer.accounts.kind(''cc''), and
> customer.accounts.kind(''ach''), all very similar to what
you could write
> before,
> but with far fewer executable lines.
> 
> I''m stoked because we just spent 3 days refactoring a big system
which
> needed
> this exact fix, and I didn''t know about it. Now I get to install
it on
> Monday.
> Merry Xmas to me, huh?!
> 
> --
>    Phlip
Just rewrote my test to make a little more sense. The first test fails 
because the order of the votes, if i reverse it it passes. Since I am 
not testing order, the third test ( votes_association_improved ) makes a 
little more sense. Is there a way to write that in one statement without 
&& ?

  test "votes_association_1" do
    assert_equal [ votes(:one), votes(:two) ], stories(:one).votes 
#FAILS
  end
  test "votes_association_2" do
    assert_equal [ votes(:two), votes(:one) ], stories(:one).votes 
#PASSES
  end
  test "votes_association_improved" do
    assert stories(:one).votes.include? votes(:one)
    assert stories(:one).votes.include? votes(:two)
  end
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Phlip

2008-Dec-21 06:05 UTC

head link

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Merrick Johnson wrote:
>   test "votes_association_improved" do
>     assert stories(:one).votes.include? votes(:one)
>     assert stories(:one).votes.include? votes(:two)
>   end
You need .to_set, and I will recommend a way to unify assert() and 
assert_equal() into an assertion that reflects all its variables and values when
it fails.

   gem install assert2

   require ''assert2''

   assert{ stories(:one).votes.to_set == votes(:one, :two).to_set }

.to_set converts an ordered array into an unordered group, so == can''t
see the
order and can''t complain.

(But don''t use assert{ 2.0 } if you use Ruby 1.8.7! A fix for Ruby 1.9
is in the
works...)

-- 
   Phlip


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Phlip

2008-Dec-21 06:13 UTC

head link

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Merrick Johnson wrote:
>       find :all, :order => ''id DESC'', :limit => 3
Note that, in a normal database - and in a unit test that generates new records 
- the ''id'' should increment monotonically as new records get
added. So ''latest''
is always the highest ''id''. (Note I have no idea if databases
must eternally
enforce this rule, but it stands to reason...)

However, a modern Rails fixture file uses a "magic ''id''
system" that builds
''id''s out of the hash of each record''s fixture name.
So the ''id''s are not
monotonic, and these problems illustrate you ought to use a timestamp, such as 
''created_at'', instead of an ''id'', to find
the latest records!

This means, instead of using .to_set in the test, you should actually pin down 
the ''created_at'' times in your fixture files. And this reminds
us, again, to use
the fixtures to tell a little story. Suggest one record is
"2.hours.ago", and
another is "5.minutes.ago", for example!

-- 
   Phlip


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Rails - Dec 2008 - unit test fails, but shouldnt have

unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have

Re: unit test fails, but shouldnt have