rspec users - Oct 2009 - factory girl rspec and authlogic

I am trying some simple test using the above items. Using the
Factory.create(...) gives Active Record errors and not the failure of
the test. Change it to u = Factory.build(...) then u.save, I do not
get the Active record error but the proper test failure message.

  it ''requires email'' do
    lambda do
      u = Factory.create(:valid_user, {:email => nil})
      #u.save
      u.errors.on(:email).should_not be_nil
    end.should_not change(User, :count)
  end

returns:
ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid in ''User requires email''
Validation failed: Email is too short (minimum is 6 characters), Email
should look like an email address.
./spec/models/user_spec.rb:34:
./spec/models/user_spec.rb:33:


However:
  it ''requires email'' do
    lambda do
      u = Factory.build(:valid_user, {:email => nil})
      u.save
      u.errors.on(:email).should be_nil
    end.should change(User, :count)
fails properly with
''User requires email'' FAILED
expected nil, got ["is too short (minimum is 6 characters)",
"should
look like an email address."]
./spec/models/user_spec.rb:36:
./spec/models/user_spec.rb:33:


It does not matter whether the first test above is above is set up as
a failing or passing test  I get the same results, ActiveRecord errors
instead of Rspec messages.

I am not sure if this is a FactoryGirl issue or Rspec issue, or me
screwing up.

Thanks

On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 8:41 PM, Don French <dhf0820 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I am trying some simple test using the above items. Using the
> Factory.create(...) gives Active Record errors and not the failure of
> the test. Change it to u = Factory.build(...) then u.save, I do not
> get the Active record error but the proper test failure message.
I don''t think you have a problem with Factory Girl *or* with RSpec.
Both are working as intended.  Factory Girl''s
''create'' method is
calling ''save!'' instead of ''save'' -- the
difference being that ''save!''
throws an exception instead of returning false when validations fail.
That''s exactly what you''re seeing.  And it''s
reasonable, because if
you ask it to create a record, it assumes that you *want a record*,
and that an inability to make one is unexpected.  The ''build''
method
is intended exactly for things like validation testing.

There are a few better ways you can test for this than what you''re
doing.  One is to try ''create'' and test for the exception it
throws:

it ''requires email'' do
  lambda { Factory.create(:valid_user, :email => nil) }.should
raise_error(ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid)
end

...This would work, but it''s clunky.  I don''t like lambdas if
I can
avoid them.  I would probably do it like this instead:

it ''requires email'' do
  u = Factory.build(:valid_user)
  u.email = nil
  u.should_not be_valid
end

Assuming another test where a :valid_user proved to actually *be*
valid, this is entire and sufficient.

If you consider it important to know what the error messages are well
(I generally don''t), you could also do:

it ''requires email'' do
  u = Factory.build(:valid_user)
  u.email = nil
  u.save.should be_false
  u.should have(2).errors.on("email")
  u.errors.on("email").should include("is too short (minimum is 6
characters)")
  u.errors.on("email").should include("should look like an email
address.")
end

In practice, even if I did care about all of that, I''d split them out
into separate examples, because I subscribe to the philosophy that a
good example should have at most one expectation.  Four "shoulds" is
three too many.  But that''s a subtle distinction, and I wanted to be
brief here.

The one thing I _wouldn''t_ do is what you''re doing in both
code
blocks, which is to wrap an expectation inside a lambda and then put
_another_ expectation outside it.  Checking that the record count did
not change is really unnecessary.  The save failed.  That''s
sufficient.

(By the way, if I screwed up any of the syntax with Factory Girl here,
my apologies.  I don''t use it; I use Machinist.  That''s
another one of
those personal preference things, though.)


-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org