Rails core - Sep 2008 - How do you write tests in rails that check implementation?

Koz et al,

I''m trying to write a patch for this ticket:

http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/1104-references_eager_loaded_tables-should-search-tables-in-join-clauses

I want to make rails better at guessing which style of :include to
execute (pre-2.1 vs 2.1+), but I don''t see any tests like what
I''m
trying to test in eager_test.rb

So how would I test that rails is doing the :include one way vs
another?  Both would work and produce identical results at the end, so
it seems not possible to functionally test this.  Yet all these tests
check the function of finders, rather than unit testing the individual
support methods (I could obviously test this by unit testing
references_eager_loaded_tables? method).  Normally here, I''d use
expectations to see that things are working under the hood the right
way...

Thanks guys!

-David Stevenson
Pivotal Labs

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

On 25 Sep 2008, at 04:14, David Stevenson wrote:
>
> Koz et al,
>
> I''m trying to write a patch for this ticket:
>
>
http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/1104-references_eager_loaded_tables-should-search-tables-in-join-clauses
>
> I want to make rails better at guessing which style of :include to
> execute (pre-2.1 vs 2.1+), but I don''t see any tests like what
I''m
> trying to test in eager_test.rb
>
> So how would I test that rails is doing the :include one way vs
> another?  Both would work and produce identical results at the end, so
> it seems not possible to functionally test this.  Yet all these tests
> check the function of finders, rather than unit testing the individual
> support methods (I could obviously test this by unit testing
> references_eager_loaded_tables? method).  Normally here, I''d use
> expectations to see that things are working under the hood the right
> way...
>
Neat - I''ve been hitting that recently. Bit of a kludge but could you  
just look at the number of queries made (ie 1 for join based monster,  
number of associations + 1 in other cases) ?

Fred

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

I haven''t look at the implementation of this, so I can only answer
generally.  However, at some point in there the code must call
different methods based on which finder strategy it chooses.  You
could identify the point at which the code paths diverge and mock the
unique methods calls for each path.  Perhaps this is what you mean by
using expectations?

Of course, I suspect you (David) are familiar with my particular
opinion on digging around in implementation details with unit tests.
If you could extract the code responsible for choosing the finder
strategy in such a way that you could use or test it in isolation,
then that would be the ideal.

On Sep 24, 8:14 pm, David Stevenson <dsboul...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Koz et al,
>
> I''m trying to write a patch for this ticket:
>
> http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994/tickets/1104-references_...
>
> I want to make rails better at guessing which style of :include to
> execute (pre-2.1 vs 2.1+), but I don''t see any tests like what
I''m
> trying to test in eager_test.rb
>
> So how would I test that rails is doing the :include one way vs
> another?  Both would work and produce identical results at the end, so
> it seems not possible to functionally test this.  Yet all these tests
> check the function of finders, rather than unit testing the individual
> support methods (I could obviously test this by unit testing
> references_eager_loaded_tables? method).  Normally here, I''d use
> expectations to see that things are working under the hood the right
> way...
>
> Thanks guys!
>
> -David Stevenson
> Pivotal Labs
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-core+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---