I''d like to test that my model attributes are properly protected
against mass
assignment, something like:
it "should NOT update :balance on mass assignment" do
@account.attributes = {:balance => 1000}
@account.balance.should_not == 1000
end
instead of doing each attribute manually however, I''d like to automate
it so
I can pass a list of attributes which CAN be assigned that way and let the
code figure out what should be protected. Here''s what I have so far :
http://pastie.caboo.se/70685
the problem is, I can''t figure out how to make "protected
attributes"
reusable. I''d like to be able to pass it a different class name and
list of
allowed attributes at run time, but AFAIK, shared behaviours can''t be
sent
parameters. I tried using instance variables, which I initialize in
''mass
assignments'' before() method, but they''re only available to
the actual spec
(lines 6-8), not the code that generates the dynamic specs (lines 3-9)
can anyone think how I might get round this?
thanks
dave
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/dynamic-specs-tf3927280.html#a11137640
Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 6/15/07, David Green <justnothing at tiscali.co.uk> wrote:> > I''d like to test that my model attributes are properly protected against mass > assignment, something like: > > it "should NOT update :balance on mass assignment" do > @account.attributes = {:balance => 1000} > @account.balance.should_not == 1000 > end > > instead of doing each attribute manually however, I''d like to automate it so > I can pass a list of attributes which CAN be assigned that way and let the > code figure out what should be protected. Here''s what I have so far : > > http://pastie.caboo.se/70685 > > the problem is, I can''t figure out how to make "protected attributes" > reusable. I''d like to be able to pass it a different class name and list of > allowed attributes at run time, but AFAIK, shared behaviours can''t be sent > parameters. I tried using instance variables, which I initialize in ''mass > assignments'' before() method, but they''re only available to the actual spec > (lines 6-8), not the code that generates the dynamic specs (lines 3-9) > > can anyone think how I might get round this?I can''t think of a good way to do it with the existing tool-set, however it does bring up an interesting idea. Check this out and let me know what you think: http://pastie.caboo.se/70700 It''s not currently supported, but it solves the problem of parameterizing shared behaviours a bit more explicitly than the current magic of setting instance variables in before(:each). WDYT?> > thanks > dave > > > -- > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/dynamic-specs-tf3927280.html#a11137640 > Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users >
On 6/15/07, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:> On 6/15/07, David Green <justnothing at tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > > > > I''d like to test that my model attributes are properly protected against mass > > assignment, something like: > > > > it "should NOT update :balance on mass assignment" do > > @account.attributes = {:balance => 1000} > > @account.balance.should_not == 1000 > > end > > > > instead of doing each attribute manually however, I''d like to automate it so > > I can pass a list of attributes which CAN be assigned that way and let the > > code figure out what should be protected. Here''s what I have so far : > > > > http://pastie.caboo.se/70685 > > > > the problem is, I can''t figure out how to make "protected attributes" > > reusable. I''d like to be able to pass it a different class name and list of > > allowed attributes at run time, but AFAIK, shared behaviours can''t be sent > > parameters. I tried using instance variables, which I initialize in ''mass > > assignments'' before() method, but they''re only available to the actual spec > > (lines 6-8), not the code that generates the dynamic specs (lines 3-9) > > > > can anyone think how I might get round this? > > I can''t think of a good way to do it with the existing tool-set, > however it does bring up an interesting idea. Check this out and let > me know what you think: > > http://pastie.caboo.se/70700 > > It''s not currently supported, but it solves the problem of > parameterizing shared behaviours a bit more explicitly than the > current magic of setting instance variables in before(:each).Actually, looking at implementing this, it would require a complete redesign of shared behaviours, and I don''t see that happening any time soon.> > WDYT? > > > > > thanks > > dave > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/dynamic-specs-tf3927280.html#a11137640 > > Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > rspec-users mailing list > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > > >
David Chelimsky-2 wrote:> >> >> I can''t think of a good way to do it with the existing tool-set, >> however it does bring up an interesting idea. Check this out and let >> me know what you think: >> >> http://pastie.caboo.se/70700 >> >> It''s not currently supported, but it solves the problem of >> parameterizing shared behaviours a bit more explicitly than the >> current magic of setting instance variables in before(:each). > > Actually, looking at implementing this, it would require a complete > redesign of shared behaviours, and I don''t see that happening any time > soon. > >> >> WDYT? >> >shame. that would have been perfect. I''d have a go at it myself but don''t think my programming quite up to standard (yet). Thanks anyway -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/dynamic-specs-tf3927280.html#a11139116 Sent from the rspec-users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.