rspec users - Mar 2009 - Changes in specs for routes in rspec 1.1.99.x

Trying the next release of rspec, I have had to make changes in the
existing specs for routing.
I have written an script with sed that makes this automatically (two
files)


spec/upgrade.sed
===============/route_for/s/id => 1/id => "1"/g
/route_for.*create/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/== {:path
=> \1, :method =>
:post}/
/route_for.*update/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/== {:path
=> \1, :method =>
:put}/
/route_for.*destroy/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/== {:path
=> \1, :method =>
:delete}/


and
spec/upgrade
===========for f in `find controllers -name "*routing*rb" -type f`; do
sed -i -f
upgrade.sed $f; done


You shoud make this file executable and run it

I hope this helps somebody.
Juanma
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Thank you for posting this.
Is this a script to replace/add arguments to the route_for methods in
my current controller routing specs?
Will the changes this script affects fix the errors I get when running
specs like " route_for(_whatever_)should == ''/foo/1''
" on :update
and :destroy actions generating a :show route?

I''ve tried adding a :method argument and passing :put and :delete - no
go on these assuring the correct routes so far. I''m off to read the
rspec source to figure out WTF changed...

On Mar 2, 4:08 am, Juanma Cervera <li... at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> Trying the next release of rspec, I have had to make changes in the
> existing specs for routing.
> I have written an script with sed that makes this automatically (two
> files)
>
> spec/upgrade.sed
> ===============> /route_for/s/id => 1/id => "1"/g
> /route_for.*create/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/==
{:path => \1, :method =>
> :post}/
> /route_for.*update/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/==
{:path => \1, :method =>
> :put}/
> /route_for.*destroy/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/==
{:path => \1, :method =>
> :delete}/
>
> and
> spec/upgrade
> ===========> for f in `find controllers -name "*routing*rb"
-type f`; do sed -i -f
> upgrade.sed $f; done
>
> You shoud make this file executable and run it
>
> I hope this helps somebody.
> Juanma
> --
> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at
rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

GAh! easy one - I was adding the method argument to the
''route_for()''
instead of the ''should =='' hash it compares the generated
output with.
And now I see how the script you made takes the single string argument
from the old style and drops it into a hash that includes the restful
method name.
Thank you for providing the clue I needed to get the correct syntax.

On Mar 2, 4:08 am, Juanma Cervera <li... at ruby-forum.com>
wrote:
> Trying the next release of rspec, I have had to make changes in the
> existing specs for routing.
> I have written an script with sed that makes this automatically (two
> files)
>
> spec/upgrade.sed
> ===============> /route_for/s/id => 1/id => "1"/g
> /route_for.*create/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/==
{:path => \1, :method =>
> :post}/
> /route_for.*update/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/==
{:path => \1, :method =>
> :put}/
> /route_for.*destroy/s/== \(["''].*["'']\)/==
{:path => \1, :method =>
> :delete}/
>
> and
> spec/upgrade
> ===========> for f in `find controllers -name "*routing*rb"
-type f`; do sed -i -f
> upgrade.sed $f; done
>
> You shoud make this file executable and run it
>
> I hope this helps somebody.
> Juanma
> --
> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-us... at
rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users