search for: vertebrate

I know there is a hash_including, which is quite useful. Are there by chance any matchers for ensuring a hash includes only the specified values, or that it doesn''t have certain values? Thanks, Steve

I have some specs that ''require'' other files. When running spec_server, if these required files are changed, it''s not picked up when the specs are run. I have to restart spec_server to get the changes recognized. Is there an option or some such to have spec_server reload required files as well when a spec is run? Thanks, Steve

I just installed on my up to date FreeBSD 5.4 box. I'm a little confused as to whether or not there are things I need to configure or not. I went to go through the docs, and it was talking about using a file named "config" as a template, and modifying from there. Well that file didn't exist anywhere on my machine, or in the source I downloaded. In fact, looking in the Wine CVS

Should the stories dir be located on the project root? I was expecting to find it located under spec/ but there isn''t anything there, just the stories dir off of /. Also there don''t appear to be any rake tasks for stories, nor generators. Should there be any? Thanks, Steve

I''m trying to write some tests for the ApplicationController as shared tests that can be run in all of my other controller tests, but am getting a nil.rewrite error. Below is what I have... describe AccountController do it_should_behave_like ''Application controller'' end describe ''Application controller'', :shared => true do it

Is the rspec_autotest plugin mentioned here, http://blog.nicksieger.com/articles/2006/11/15/rspec-autotest-now-a-rails-plugin the accepted method of auto testing specs? It''s an old article, and after grabbing the plugin, and giving it a run, it fails with: $ rake spec:autotest:rails

I had posted this on the regular Rails list, but upon trying this in script/console, it seems like the behavior only exists when running rspec. I''m getting some weird behavior in one of my models. I have a model defined something like this class User < ActiveRecord::Base attr_accessor :password validates_presence_of :password end If I validate the model without specifying a

...nction(m[i,c(1,....,129)],PARAMETER,cbind(Var1,...,Var129)seq(1,len=50 00),F) } Any ideas on how to avoid this memory allocation problem would be greatly appreciated. Garbage collection? (or is that too slow?) Many Thanks in Advance! Mike Mike Hickerson University of California Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 3101 Valley Life Sciences Building Berkeley, California  94720-3160  USA voice 510-642-8911 cell: 510-701-0861 fax 510-643-8238 mhick@berkeley.edu [[alternative text/enriched version deleted]]

...function(nn){ > for (ii in 1:nn){ > ee=rep(rbinom(6000, 200, .5), ii) > if (any(ee==100)) > } Thanks, Matt MacManes ******************************************************** Matthew D. MacManes PhD Student UC- Berkeley Department of Integrative Biology Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 3101 VLSB #3140 Berkeley, CA 94720 (510)642-7782 EMAIL: macmanes at berkeley.edu WEBSITE: http://ib.berkeley.edu/labs/lacey/

Just wondering if anyone else thinks that ''response.should be_success'' is potentially misleading. If you''re writing a spec for an action that is failing in some way it can still have a status 200. So while the HTTP request was technically successful, something in the action was not. Perhaps something like ''response.should have_success_status''? Steve

...be so kind and give me a hint how to get the same test statistics (e.g.Pillai's) and P values for the predefined contrasts? Best regards Ondrej Mikula -- Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Veveri 97, 60200 Brno, Czech Republic Institute of Vertebrate Biology Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic Studenec 122, 67502 Konesin, Czech Republic [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

Is anyone out there writing specs to check attr_accessible fields? I had originally written my spec to check for allowing the desired fields, and then none of the other regular db fields. Unfortunately this isn''t satisfactory, because attr_protected could have been used instead, which of course wouldn''t prevent mass assignment to any whatever=(val) method. I''m thinking

Hey guys, Does anyone have any wisdom to share on the subject of speccing Rails layouts? Most of it''s plain old view specs stuff, but are there sensible ways to verify things like the yield call? (Mocking doesn''t catch that) Thanks, Matt -- Matt Patterson | Design & Code <matt at reprocessed org> | http://www.reprocessed.org/

Does anyone know if there''s a vim plugin out there that will show a tree of your describe/it blocks at a glance. Preferably with click ability to go right to that location? Thanks, Steve

Hello, I cant seen to find the equivalent function in version 2.1.1. This always served as a nice preliminary tool for looking visually at data. Thanks, Matt Matthew MacManes PhD Student Museum of Vertebrate Zoology Department of Integrative Biology UC-Berkeley Berkeley, CA. 94720 Office: (510) 642-7782 Fax: (510) 643-8238 macmanes@berkeley.edu [[alternative HTML version deleted]]

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 just curious if there''s a reason why rspec doesn''t add the various spec dirs to $: so that "requires" can be done without specifying the full path name. Thanks, Steve

I just updated to r2784, and now all of my specs output the ''.'' and then ''WARNING: there is already a transaction in progress'', either once or twice before the next dot. It''s indicating that all specs are passing, there''s just a whole ton of noise for some reason. Any idea what causes this to be thrown out there? Is this an RSpec thing? Steve

I have some finders in my models where I write some of the sql myself. I of course want to test these, but am not sure the best way. Should I just let them roll through to the db, and verify they return the correct objects based on the fixtures I load, or should I spec the actual query? I know that DB access is sort of frowned upon, but is this a situation where it is more or less acceptable? My

Can anyone tell me what I''m doing wrong here? it ''should try to set the current user from the session'' do controller.session[SessionKeys::USER_ID] = 1 user = mock_model(User) User.stub!(:find).and_return(user) User.should_receive(:find).with(1).and_return(user) controller.should_receive(:set_current_user) do_request end When I watch the spec with my