search for: chrisjroos

I''ve found myself mocking out a published api in my set-up method. This has led to some contexts having a large set-up and empty specifications. As the mocks get auto-verified, the specification blocks have nothing to do but serve as documentation. Does this sound bad? Chris

Hi James, An instance retains its mocha between tests if that instance is pointed to by a constant. The simplest failing test is something like (add as a new file in mocha/test).. #--code-- require File.join(File.dirname(__FILE__), "test_helper") require ''stubba'' class WemStubbaTest < Test::Unit::TestCase Arr = [1, 2, 3] def test_a

Hi the list people, hi Ezra, I just read from this message http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/backgroundrb-devel/2006-July/000134.html that BackgrounDRb will offer a way to kill a worker from within itself. As this message is from 7/25, I wonder if this feature has been added since. If not, is there any way to do it? I tried this: MiddleMan.delete_worker(@_job_key) But it raise: uninitialized

Am I correct in thinking that it''s not currently possible to have a method that creates a ''standard'' mock (i.e. a mock that has defaults useful in all contexts)? I''ve tried with the mock method and also by manually creating new Mock instances. I get failures when setting up expectations (undefined method ''receive'' for proc). Chris

Hi everybody, Is there a gem or something for working directly with Subversion from a RoR app? Thanks, Tiffani A.B. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://wrath.rubyonrails.org/pipermail/rails/attachments/20060727/26846e72/attachment-0001.html

I hacked together a command for textmate that displays Active Record object attributes in a tooltip. Just thought others might find it useful. Chris [1] http://blog.seagul.co.uk/articles/2006/07/14/textmate-command-to-display-active-record-column-attributes

Could one of the admins maybe specify the reply-to address for this mailing list? It''s frustrating to realise you''ve just sent a message to an individual, having meant to send to list. Chris

I''ve added a command that displays the html formatted output of some specifications. It''s as simple as.. #!/bin/sh /usr/bin/env spec $TM_FILEPATH -fhtml I''m wondering if anyone has anything more sophisticated (although to be fair, this does the job for now)? I''ve seen some posts about a rspec on rails textmate command but haven''t taken a look at it

I am just starting to use unit testing. Way cool. But I am not finding very clear docs on assert_raise. I have managed to write a test that tells me that the destroy I am trying to test fails with a RuntimeError (as it should). However, I would really like to test that it rails for the specific reason I have in my model. How can I get more specific? Am I going to have to create my own exception

I just notices my app was down, and in the log file were lots of these: No space left on device - ../config/../tmp/sessions//ruby_sess.898b1cf95e14f8e3 So i figured that i had too many sessions. I went through and deleted the sessions and then in a few minutes, the site was back up again. Can anyone explain this? Did I do the right thing? Is there a way I can tell my app to accept more

Hi. I''m loving mocha but have ran into a problem with using the mocha plugin with a project that has the SslRequirement plugin. It seems there is some conflict between the two? Any ideas? $ ruby test/functional/calendar_controller_test.rb /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-1.4.0/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:478:in `const_missing'': uninitialized constant

Hi all, I am having a weird problem reading a value from my model. basicaly, I have these two models: class Category < ActiveRecord::Base acts_as_tree :order => "name" belongs_to :item_type has_many :specific_category_names end and class SpecificCategoryName < ActiveRecord::Base set_table_name "Specific_category_names" has_many :products belongs_to

Hello, I''m wanting to use Mocha and Stubba for my tests in place of the default Rails testing with fixtures. I have the following class: class Person < ActiveRecord::Base validates_uniqueness_of :email end and am wondering how I can test to ensure that the validates_uniqueness_of validation is running. Any ideas? -Jonathan

Let''s say that I have a procedure that: * gets the number of bytes to write into some file * and returns the number of successfully written bytes def save( text, len ) This procedure is being used all over the place especially inside the method "process" which I want to test. Thus in order not to polute my filesystem I stub the "save" procedure. But of course in

I''m trying to post a patch and trac is erroring with... --trac error output -- Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/main.py", line 314, in dispatch_request dispatcher.dispatch(req) File "/usr/local/lib/python2.4/site-packages/trac/web/main.py", line 199, in dispatch resp =

I just ran into the same problem as James Hughes (thread "Rake tasks fail silently, how to debug?"). I''m wondering if the rake backgroundrb:setup task should always overwrite the script/backgroundrb files to be on the safe side. Or at least warn that some already exist. Maybe there''s a way to be noisy if the backgroundrb:start task doesn''t actually start a

Hi, I was just creating some new workers (MiddleMan.new_worker) with the same job_key. The first worker for a given key is created correctly. Any subsequent requests to create and greeted with the ''connection closed'' error. I realise that it''s not possible to have two workers with the same key, but maybe a friendlier error message is in order. Chris

Hi, I''m wanting to upload a text file to the server that is processed from a backgroundrb worker. I currently have it working but I''m wondering if there are any recommended approaches for this kind of work? My approach is currently to write the uploaded file to a known place on disk. I pass the filename to my worker which then reads, processes and deletes the file. Are there

Am I correct in thinking that this is no longer required? The only place I could see it used (script/start) was commented out. Chris

Hi, I''d really appreciate someone looking at some specifications I have. The context in each case is realised in the setup block (I''m assuming this is standard practice?). The specifications should be self-explanatory. I''m wondering if anyone can see anything obviously bad/wrong with what I have? I''m intentionally not stating anything else as in theory the