similar to: describe block proc parameter as alternative to before blocks?

It doesn''t seem like my controller specs are calling my middleware on requests. Has anyone figured out a good way to test middlware with rspec? I''m thinking something like rails'' rails/actionpack/test/controller/session/mem_cache_store_test.rb but with rspec... any thoughts? Thanks! Best, Aaron -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

Hello, I have a controller action that raises a RecordNotFound exception if you''re not allowed to see something. In my global application controller (application.rb), I catch these and render the 404 template. But when I run cucumber (using webrat), it''s getting the full stacktrace (the step blows up). Any ideas why? I have consider_all_requests_local turned off in my test.rb.

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Scott Taylor <scott at railsnewbie.com> wrote: > > On Oct 14, 2009, at 3:36 PM, Joaquin Rivera Padron wrote: > > hello there, > how do you tipically spec private methods? The thing is ? have something > like this: > > def some_method > ?? complex_method + other_complex_methods > end > > private > def complex_method...

We had an after(:each) callback that looked like this: PurchaseOrder.find(:all).each {|po| DraftInvoice.find_all_by_po_number(po.po_number).each {|di| di.destroy}} which we were hoping would reset some purchase order data in a certain way. However, because we have "self.use_transactional_fixtures = true" set in test_helper.rb, this code was never getting committed. So, I just

So after I updated all my gems, I started getting: /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/activesupport-2.3.4/lib/active_support/ dependencies.rb:105:in `const_missing'': uninitialized constant Test::Unit::TestResult::TestResultFailureSupport (NameError) from /Library/Ruby/Gems/1.8/gems/test-unit-2.0.3/lib/test/unit/ testresult.rb:28 from /Library/Ruby/Site/1.8/rubygems/custom_require.rb:31:in

rspec-rails version 1.2.9 has been released! * <http://rspec.info> * <http://rubyforge.org/projects/rspec> * <http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec-rails> * <http://wiki.github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/rails> * <rspec-devel at rubyforge.org> Behaviour Driven Development for Ruby on Rails. Changes: ### Version 1.2.9 / 2009-10-05 * enhancements * added route_to and

How would you spec out something like the following: def a_method x = Class.new do include Enumerable end # do something here with x end describe "The Anonymous Class" do before :each do @anonymous_class = mock Class Class.stub!(:new).and_return @anonymous_class end it "should create a new anonymous class" do

I''m a big fan of stubbing Time.now so it returns a known value. I used to be able to use stubba and say: @time_now = Time.parse("Jan 1 2001") Time.stubs(:now).returns(lambda{@time_now}) However, something in trunk broke that. Fine, rspec''s got its own stubbing lib now, so I tried switching to that: @time_now = Time.parse("Jan 1 2001")

Is it possible to create a stub that returns hash values. For example I would like to convert this: @siteItem = stub(''plmSiteItem'', :one => "uno") To something like this: @siteItem = stub(''plmSiteItem'', {''one'' => ''uno'', ''two'' => ''dos''} ) So that I can do this:

hello, I''ve already asked via Rails channels on this and have received no response, so I''m asking here in hopes someone has run into something similar. I updated to rails 2.3.3 yesterday, and now all of my specs are failing with the following error: Fixture::FormatError in ''PublishedGallery Methods#thumbnail should delegate to its lead asset'' a YAML error

I''m setting up a Paypal IPN listener and need the create action to not use rails'' default CSRF protection. I''ve got that working fine & test it actually works with cucumber (where I''ve turned CSRF back on, since it''s full-stack testing) but would like my controller spec to mention the need for protect_from_forgery :except => [:create] (and fail

Consider the following method: def name_to_terminal puts "Scott Taylor" end How would I spec this out? Scott

I like Shoulda. Sometimes I like plain old Test::Unit. Cucumber gives me a different thought process. I''d just like to hear some thoughts on why RSpec? What does it buy me that I can''t get with Shoulda? I just can''t seem to think in RSpec. Where is there a good example of RSpec tests that will help me grasp the right path? Thanks! -- Amos King

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 5:40 AM, Daniel Tenner<daniel.rspec at tenner.org> wrote: > Hi all, > Like everyone (?), I use nested contexts to keep my specs well organised and > tidy. > However, I have a problem. I have various sets of specs that needs to > perform very time-expensive operations to set up the fixtures that will be > examined in the tests. Two specific examples:

> On 5/5/07, Luis Lavena <luislavena at gmail.com> wrote: > > describe "A User (in general)" do > > before(:each) do > > @user = User.new > > end > > > > it { @user.should have_many(:contest_public_votes) } > > it { @user.should have_many(:design_industry_user_interests) } > > it { @user.should

Hello, Just decided to check whether I am doing something that makes sense or not. I was thinking about how cool would it be to re-use examples (just like we reuse story scenarios with GivenScenario). I was not sure if this possibility already exists in rspec (and, honestly, was lazy to check), so I have created this helper: def given_it(name) example_definition =

Trying to spec the following but don''t know if I''m using the right matcher. How do I spec? Plz, sugar on tops. Audience.stats - should have a stats of 80 when passed a flux of 10 - should return an error when passed a string (ERROR - 1) 1) TypeError in ''Audience.stats should return an error when passed a string'' String can''t be coerced into Fixnum

Rspec is all about using natural language to define behavior. In this context, I feel that lambda is sorely out of place. I was chatting on #irc and a pal of mine (wycats) proposed an interesting alternative: alias_method :doing, :lambda so instead of something like lambda {post :create, {:title => nil}}.should raise_error(ActiveRecord::RecordInvalid) we get doing {post :create, {:title

Sprinkling my examples with ''lambda'' has always seemed like a bit of a wart to me. I''ve gotten into the habit of adding ''alias :calling :lambda'' to my spec suites. My examples then look like: calling { Foo }.should raise_error calling { Bar }.should_not raise_error Is there a reason that RSpec core has chosen not to make exception expectations more

Hi, When upgrading to rspec/rspec-rails 1.2.6 gem (from 1.1.12), I''m having a new problem verifying routes that should not exist. This is to support something like this in routes.rb: map.resources :orders do |orders| orders.resources :items, :except => [:index,:show] end I used to use lambda {}.should_raise( routing error ), but it stopped detecting any raised error.