thr3ads.net - Rails - RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested? [Jun 2011]

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

daze

2011-Jun-13 13:36 UTC

RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

I''m going through The RSpec Book, and (specifically around page 333) I
encountered a problem.  Basically, whenever I use "should
have_selector" in a nested form, it silently passes when it SHOULD
fail.

I''ve been copying the code exactly as from the book.  Now, there is
one major difference - I''m using Capybara while the book is using
Webrat.  Why?  I''ve had bigger problems with Webrat.  In fact, when I
switch to Webrat by putting it in the Gemfile, I get this unidentified
method error in which has_selector isn''t recognized (which is doubly
odd because this happens where I call have_selector...)

Anyway, here''s the code:

-------new.html.erb_spec.rb-------

require ''spec_helper''

describe "messages/new.html.erb" do

  let(:message) do
    mock_model("Message").as_new_record.as_null_object
  end

  before do
    assign :message, message
  end

  it "renders a form to create a message" do
    render
    rendered.should have_selector("form",
      :method => "post",
      :action => messages_path
    ) do |form|
      form.should have_selector("input", :type =>
"submit")  # this
should be failing right now!!!
    end
  end

  # this should be failing right now!!!
  it "renders a text field for the message title" do
    message.stub(:title => "the title")
    render
    rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
      form.should have_selector("input",
        :type => "submit",
        :name => "message[title]",
        :value => "the title"
      )
    end
  end

  # this should be failing right now!!!
  it "renders a text area for the message text" do
    message.stub(:text => "the message")
    render
    rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
      form.should have_selector("textarea",
        :name => "message[text]",
        :content => "the message"
      )
    end
  end
end

-----new.html.erb------

<%= form_for @message do |f| %>

# nothing is in here, so those nested "should have_selector"
statements should fail

<% end %>


Thanks in advance!

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

David Chelimsky

2011-Jun-13 15:02 UTC

head link

Re: RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

On Jun 13, 8:36 am, daze
<dmonopol...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:> I''m going through The RSpec Book, and (specifically around page
333) I
> encountered a problem.  Basically, whenever I use "should
> have_selector" in a nested form, it silently passes when it SHOULD
> fail.
>
> I''ve been copying the code exactly as from the book.  Now, there
is
> one major difference - I''m using Capybara while the book is using
> Webrat.  Why?  I''ve had bigger problems with Webrat.  In fact,
when I
> switch to Webrat by putting it in the Gemfile, I get this unidentified
> method error in which has_selector isn''t recognized (which is
doubly
> odd because this happens where I call have_selector...)
>
> Anyway, here''s the code:
>
> -------new.html.erb_spec.rb-------
>
> require ''spec_helper''
>
> describe "messages/new.html.erb" do
>
>   let(:message) do
>     mock_model("Message").as_new_record.as_null_object
>   end
>
>   before do
>     assign :message, message
>   end
>
>   it "renders a form to create a message" do
>     render
>     rendered.should have_selector("form",
>       :method => "post",
>       :action => messages_path
>     ) do |form|
>       form.should have_selector("input", :type =>
"submit")  # this
> should be failing right now!!!
>     end
>   end
>
>   # this should be failing right now!!!
>   it "renders a text field for the message title" do
>     message.stub(:title => "the title")
>     render
>     rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
>       form.should have_selector("input",
>         :type => "submit",
>         :name => "message[title]",
>         :value => "the title"
>       )
>     end
>   end
>
>   # this should be failing right now!!!
>   it "renders a text area for the message text" do
>     message.stub(:text => "the message")
>     render
>     rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
>       form.should have_selector("textarea",
>         :name => "message[text]",
>         :content => "the message"
>       )
>     end
>   end
> end
>
> -----new.html.erb------
>
> <%= form_for @message do |f| %>
>
> # nothing is in here, so those nested "should have_selector"
> statements should fail
>
> <% end %>
>
> Thanks in advance!
The examples in the book use webrat, which has a has_selector matcher
that supports nesting. The capybara have_selector matcher does not
support nesting (yet). You don''t get any feedback because Ruby lets
you pass a block to any method, and leaves it to the method to handle
it or ignore it. In this case it''s being ignored.

HTH,
David

-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

daze

2011-Jun-13 18:22 UTC

head link

Re: RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

Thank you.  But then what should be the work around for this with
Capybara?  I was leaning toward using capybara...

Actually, do you recommend webrat over capybara?  I just want one with
good documentation and stick with one for the sake of getting used to
the syntax.

Now... One last thing.  I notice that when I try webrat, has_content?
no longer works.
I''m guessing has_content? is specific to Capybara... is "should
contain" the equivalent in webrat?

Thanks again.

On Jun 13, 11:02 am, David Chelimsky
<dchelim...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:> On Jun 13, 8:36 am, daze
<dmonopol...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > I''m going through The RSpec Book, and (specifically around
page 333) I
> > encountered a problem.  Basically, whenever I use "should
> > have_selector" in a nested form, it silently passes when it
SHOULD
> > fail.
>
> > I''ve been copying the code exactly as from the book.  Now,
there is
> > one major difference - I''m using Capybara while the book is
using
> > Webrat.  Why?  I''ve had bigger problems with Webrat.  In
fact, when I
> > switch to Webrat by putting it in the Gemfile, I get this unidentified
> > method error in which has_selector isn''t recognized (which is
doubly
> > odd because this happens where I call have_selector...)
>
> > Anyway, here''s the code:
>
> > -------new.html.erb_spec.rb-------
>
> > require ''spec_helper''
>
> > describe "messages/new.html.erb" do
>
> >   let(:message) do
> >     mock_model("Message").as_new_record.as_null_object
> >   end
>
> >   before do
> >     assign :message, message
> >   end
>
> >   it "renders a form to create a message" do
> >     render
> >     rendered.should have_selector("form",
> >       :method => "post",
> >       :action => messages_path
> >     ) do |form|
> >       form.should have_selector("input", :type =>
"submit")  # this
> > should be failing right now!!!
> >     end
> >   end
>
> >   # this should be failing right now!!!
> >   it "renders a text field for the message title" do
> >     message.stub(:title => "the title")
> >     render
> >     rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
> >       form.should have_selector("input",
> >         :type => "submit",
> >         :name => "message[title]",
> >         :value => "the title"
> >       )
> >     end
> >   end
>
> >   # this should be failing right now!!!
> >   it "renders a text area for the message text" do
> >     message.stub(:text => "the message")
> >     render
> >     rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
> >       form.should have_selector("textarea",
> >         :name => "message[text]",
> >         :content => "the message"
> >       )
> >     end
> >   end
> > end
>
> > -----new.html.erb------
>
> > <%= form_for @message do |f| %>
>
> > # nothing is in here, so those nested "should have_selector"
> > statements should fail
>
> > <% end %>
>
> > Thanks in advance!
>
> The examples in the book use webrat, which has a has_selector matcher
> that supports nesting. The capybara have_selector matcher does not
> support nesting (yet). You don''t get any feedback because Ruby
lets
> you pass a block to any method, and leaves it to the method to handle
> it or ignore it. In this case it''s being ignored.
>
> HTH,
> David
-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

David Chelimsky

2011-Jun-13 21:03 UTC

head link

Re: RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

On Jun 13, 1:22 pm, daze
<dmonopol...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:> Thank you.  But then what should be the work around for this with
> Capybara?  I was leaning toward using capybara...

rendered.should have_selector("form
input[@type=''submit'']")

You can also use assert_select which ships with Rails and supports
nesting if you prefer.
> Actually, do you recommend webrat over capybara?  I just want one with
> good documentation and stick with one for the sake of getting used to
> the syntax.
That''s tricky. Capybara is under regular development and has a growing
user base. Webrat has been around longer and already supports the
matchers you''re looking for, but hasn''t had a commit in 5
months. I''m
using Capy on new projects if you want to take that as a
recommendation.
> Now... One last thing.  I notice that when I try webrat, has_content?
> no longer works.
> I''m guessing has_content? is specific to Capybara... is
"should
> contain" the equivalent in webrat?
Yep.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> On Jun 13, 11:02 am, David Chelimsky
<dchelim...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 8:36 am, daze
<dmonopol...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > > I''m going through The RSpec Book, and (specifically
around page 333) I
> > > encountered a problem.  Basically, whenever I use "should
> > > have_selector" in a nested form, it silently passes when it
SHOULD
> > > fail.
>
> > > I''ve been copying the code exactly as from the book.
 Now, there is
> > > one major difference - I''m using Capybara while the book
is using
> > > Webrat.  Why?  I''ve had bigger problems with Webrat.  In
fact, when I
> > > switch to Webrat by putting it in the Gemfile, I get this
unidentified
> > > method error in which has_selector isn''t recognized
(which is doubly
> > > odd because this happens where I call have_selector...)
>
> > > Anyway, here''s the code:
>
> > > -------new.html.erb_spec.rb-------
>
> > > require ''spec_helper''
>
> > > describe "messages/new.html.erb" do
>
> > >   let(:message) do
> > >     mock_model("Message").as_new_record.as_null_object
> > >   end
>
> > >   before do
> > >     assign :message, message
> > >   end
>
> > >   it "renders a form to create a message" do
> > >     render
> > >     rendered.should have_selector("form",
> > >       :method => "post",
> > >       :action => messages_path
> > >     ) do |form|
> > >       form.should have_selector("input", :type =>
"submit")  # this
> > > should be failing right now!!!
> > >     end
> > >   end
>
> > >   # this should be failing right now!!!
> > >   it "renders a text field for the message title" do
> > >     message.stub(:title => "the title")
> > >     render
> > >     rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
> > >       form.should have_selector("input",
> > >         :type => "submit",
> > >         :name => "message[title]",
> > >         :value => "the title"
> > >       )
> > >     end
> > >   end
>
> > >   # this should be failing right now!!!
> > >   it "renders a text area for the message text" do
> > >     message.stub(:text => "the message")
> > >     render
> > >     rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
> > >       form.should have_selector("textarea",
> > >         :name => "message[text]",
> > >         :content => "the message"
> > >       )
> > >     end
> > >   end
> > > end
>
> > > -----new.html.erb------
>
> > > <%= form_for @message do |f| %>
>
> > > # nothing is in here, so those nested "should
have_selector"
> > > statements should fail
>
> > > <% end %>
>
> > > Thanks in advance!
>
> > The examples in the book use webrat, which has a has_selector matcher
> > that supports nesting. The capybara have_selector matcher does not
> > support nesting (yet). You don''t get any feedback because
Ruby lets
> > you pass a block to any method, and leaves it to the method to handle
> > it or ignore it. In this case it''s being ignored.
>
> > HTH,
> > David
-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

paul h

2011-Jun-14 13:52 UTC

head link

Re: RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

On Jun 13, 7:22 pm, daze
<dmonopol...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:> Thank you.  But then what should be the work around for this with
> Capybara?  I was leaning toward using capybara...
>
> Actually, do you recommend webrat over capybara?  I just want one with
> good documentation and stick with one for the sake of getting used to
> the syntax.
>
Cucumber has dropped Webrat in favour of Capybara. So, if you are
likely to use Cucumber for integration testing, alongside RSpec for
the unit tests, then I would choose Capybara, otherwise you will be
stuck with the old cuke gem that uses Webrat.

There were also some issues with Webrat (details of which I can''t
recall right now, possibly to do with Devise) but they went away when
I switched to Capybara a few months back. Also, the switch was
painless.

So, FWIW, I would recommend Capybara.

Regards

Paul
> Now... One last thing.  I notice that when I try webrat, has_content?
> no longer works.
> I''m guessing has_content? is specific to Capybara... is
"should
> contain" the equivalent in webrat?
>
> Thanks again.
>
> On Jun 13, 11:02 am, David Chelimsky
<dchelim...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jun 13, 8:36 am, daze
<dmonopol...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > > I''m going through The RSpec Book, and (specifically
around page 333) I
> > > encountered a problem.  Basically, whenever I use "should
> > > have_selector" in a nested form, it silently passes when it
SHOULD
> > > fail.
>
> > > I''ve been copying the code exactly as from the book.
 Now, there is
> > > one major difference - I''m using Capybara while the book
is using
> > > Webrat.  Why?  I''ve had bigger problems with Webrat.  In
fact, when I
> > > switch to Webrat by putting it in the Gemfile, I get this
unidentified
> > > method error in which has_selector isn''t recognized
(which is doubly
> > > odd because this happens where I call have_selector...)
>
> > > Anyway, here''s the code:
>
> > > -------new.html.erb_spec.rb-------
>
> > > require ''spec_helper''
>
> > > describe "messages/new.html.erb" do
>
> > >   let(:message) do
> > >     mock_model("Message").as_new_record.as_null_object
> > >   end
>
> > >   before do
> > >     assign :message, message
> > >   end
>
> > >   it "renders a form to create a message" do
> > >     render
> > >     rendered.should have_selector("form",
> > >       :method => "post",
> > >       :action => messages_path
> > >     ) do |form|
> > >       form.should have_selector("input", :type =>
"submit")  # this
> > > should be failing right now!!!
> > >     end
> > >   end
>
> > >   # this should be failing right now!!!
> > >   it "renders a text field for the message title" do
> > >     message.stub(:title => "the title")
> > >     render
> > >     rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
> > >       form.should have_selector("input",
> > >         :type => "submit",
> > >         :name => "message[title]",
> > >         :value => "the title"
> > >       )
> > >     end
> > >   end
>
> > >   # this should be failing right now!!!
> > >   it "renders a text area for the message text" do
> > >     message.stub(:text => "the message")
> > >     render
> > >     rendered.should have_selector("form") do |form|
> > >       form.should have_selector("textarea",
> > >         :name => "message[text]",
> > >         :content => "the message"
> > >       )
> > >     end
> > >   end
> > > end
>
> > > -----new.html.erb------
>
> > > <%= form_for @message do |f| %>
>
> > > # nothing is in here, so those nested "should
have_selector"
> > > statements should fail
>
> > > <% end %>
>
> > > Thanks in advance!
>
> > The examples in the book use webrat, which has a has_selector matcher
> > that supports nesting. The capybara have_selector matcher does not
> > support nesting (yet). You don''t get any feedback because
Ruby lets
> > you pass a block to any method, and leaves it to the method to handle
> > it or ignore it. In this case it''s being ignored.
>
> > HTH,
> > David- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
-- 
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-talk+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.

Rails - Jun 2011 - RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

Re: RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

Re: RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

Re: RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?

Re: RSpec / Capybara ? (from The RSpec Book): Why might "should have_selector" silently pass when nested?