search for: integrate_view

describe MyController do integrate_views describe "A common base senario" do it "no longer integrates views" do be_careful end end end integrate_views affects an attribute in the class formed by the describe factory method. The second describe generates its own class, so integrate_views is OFF at th...

I wanted to use "integrate_views" as Ryan explains in his RailsCast #71 (http://railscasts.com/episodes/71) ...but I can''t get it to work: the view code in not executed I looked everywhere but I can''t understand what I am doing wrong. Here is what I did: I created a new application from scratch (Rails 2.0...

Is there a way to always use integrate_views for all controller specs? I hate having to remember to insert that line into each one. Thanks, Joe

I posted a ticket to lighthouse: http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645-rspec/tickets/595-deprecate-integrate_views Please put your comments and thoughts there, as that is the best place for that discussion. I wanted to make it more "visible" so it could get wide community participation in case there are folks who absolutely feel integrate_views is necessary (considering that we now have Cucumber)....

The ability to choose a mocking framework is great as I prefer mocha, but I am have problems. On my controller specs, I am forced to ''integrate_views'' as the following code below shows you, the mocking of views is rspec specific. See stub! versus mocha''s stub unless block_given? unless integrate_views? @template.stub!(:file_exists?).and_return(true) @template.should_receive...

...ontroller spec. Because a controller spec normally doesn''t render views, render_to_string just returns the path of the view, rather than the rendered output. This prevents me from testing the output of render_to_string in the controller spec. I can work around the issue by using integrate_views, and I guess that''s fine, but shouldn''t render_to_string really work in controllers? Thanks for your input, e. -- ericw at xmtp.net "If the answer isn''t violence, neither is your silence!" -- Pop Will Eat Itself, "Ich Bin Ein...

Hi everybody, 1) Does anybody have full working example of how to test partial templates? 2) What the correct place to test partials: controller or view spec? If controller correct place, should I use integrate_views? 3) Is it true that expect_render is deprecated and I have to use should_receive(:render) 4) How to test that partial''s locals hash is correct? Thx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments...

...hod : return render_file_without_locale(localized_path, use_full_path, local_assigns) if file_exists? localized_path This line always evaluates to true in RSpec context, but to false in the application. After a lot of digging I found out that RspecOnRails overrides file_exists? with a stub when integrate_views is not set (lib/spec/rails/dsl/behaviour/controller.rb:57): @template.stub!(:file_exists?).and_return(true) Now I''m not sure what would be the best solution. Since I know about this, I could simply add the same extension as GetText does to the expected rendered view path: response.s...

...acancy.stub!(:body) @vacancy.stub!(:contract) @vacancy.stub!(:location) @vacancy.stub!(:salary) @vacancy.stub!(:benefits) @vacancy.stub!(:start_date) @vacancy.stub!(:duration) I have to stub each of these methods so that the form renders correctly (as I am using integrate_views). This just feels *way* too much code and effort to do this. I have a spec for one controller (which just does plain old CRUD) that is over 300 LOC -- this seems a bit nuts to me when the controller is only 50 LOC. Does anybody have any suggestions on how to avoid this or perhaps I am doing somet...

Given this code (which renders rjs), I''m faced with the fixture- driven way of spec-ing or mocking. How the heck to you mock this so the code at line (2) and (4) work right? I''m still struggling with mocks but it seems like this can be done. Forgive the naivety of this question. 1. def change_quantity 2. @line_item = LineItem.find_by_id(params[:id]) 3. unless

...ests in spec/controllers/downloads_controller_spec.rb is below. I know it is running and I know that before the ''describe'', Partner.count == 0, so no fixture. require File.expand_path(File.dirname(__FILE__) + ''/../spec_helper'') describe DownloadsController do integrate_views describe "when PDF is ready" do before(:each) do @registrant = Factory.create(:step_5_registrant) stub(@registrant).merge_pdf { `touch #{@registrant.pdf_file_path}` } @registrant.generate_pdf @registrant.save! end it "provides a link to downlo...

Hello, everyone. I''ve been lurking here for a while, but this is my first post. I think I''ve run into a RSpec bug in a Rails project I''m working on. I was working on a few REST controllers, and started getting failures on a specific spec that verified whether a certain action returned XML output. I spent quite a lot of time checking my code to see if it was something I

Is there an easy way to spec that a controller should include helpers other than its own? I was thinking I could just spec responds_to for methods I''m interested in in the view, but that seems like crossing a separation boundary, that the controller maybe doesn''t need to know about? Thanks, Steve

I''m spec''ing a model with an observer that sends mail. Mailers behave similarly to controllers, so to make the whole thing work, I believe something like integrate_views has to be available. Has anyone dealt with observers and ActionMailer? Thanks

There is a warning on the web site about expect_render and stub_render: "WARNING: expect_render and stub_render, while very useful, act differently from standard Message Expectations (a.k.a. mock expectations), which would never pass calls through to the real object. This can be very confusing when there are failures if you''re not aware of this fact, because some calls will be

...like this: <br /><%= link_to_unless_current ''Writing'', writing_path %> and I have a spec which calls this page, and checks to see that ''Writing'' is not a link: describe "''/writing/''" do controller_name :abstracts integrate_views it "should not link ''Writing''" do get ''index'', :index => { :select => ''new'' } response.body.should_not have_tag( ''a'', ''Writing'' ) end end ... and it fails. Normally, I'&...

...specs like this that risk is real. So you should be doing this in conjunction with integration testing." [2] http://railsforum.com/viewtopic.php?id=6528 "I took the past few hours and removed nearly all mocks from my specs. I also merged the controller and view specs into one using "integrate_views" in the controller spec. I am also loading all fixtures for each controller spec so there''s some test data to fill the views. The end result? My specs are shorter, simpler, more consistent, less rigid, and they test the entire stack together (model, view, controller) so no bugs can...

I''m using RSpec. describe UserController do it "should require ..." do post :login, {:name => ''root''} puts response.body.to_yaml end end ....--- user/login ????? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this

I''m having the exact problem described in this earlier post: http://www.nabble.com/Odd-response.body-behavior-to12837556.html#a12837556 That is, after a post, response.body is just the controller/view string ("user/login" in my case). Failing to find any answer on the web, I''m trying to trace execution, but hitting a bit of a snag. I''m tracing the ancestry

...7. * keep spec_server working against edge rails (Jonathan Tron). Closes #685. * create lib/tasks if not present when running script/generate rspec. Closes #687. * fixed regression (and added spec so it won''t regress again) where render => :inline didn''t render unless integrate_views was set * fixed nil.with_output_buffer bug in helper specs. Closes #719.