similar to: have_tag and line numbers

Hi Was just using have_tag on an xml response and found the problem outlined and resolved here http://weblog.jamisbuck.org/2007/1/4/assert_xml_select Just wondered if there is any support in rspec? Cheers Shane Shane Mingins ELC Technologies (TM) PO Box 247 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 Phone: +64 4 568 6684 Mobile: +64 21 435 586 Email: smingins at elctech.com AIM: ShaneMingins Skype:

When writing view specs is there any way to test not only for the presence of tags (have_tag) and nested tags (with_tag), but also test that they appear in a given order? For example, consider the following: it ''should display the login names, display names and email address in alternating rows'' do response.should have_tag(''div.odd>div'') do

Hi, Is there a way to use the have_tag matcher on a string instead of the response body from a view? I have a helper in a method rails project that returns an html fragment which I would like to test. Like this: module SomeHelper def some_helper_method "<p>foo</p>" end end context "The SomeHelper" helper_name :some specify do

I wanted to test that the links below were being rendered in the views. - content_for :sidebar do %ul.links %li= edit_link edit_admin_contact_url(@contact), "Contact" # view test it "should have the correct side bar links" do do_render response.should have_tag("ul.links") do with_tag("a[href=?]",

Hi Google has not helped me here. I''m looking for a way to use the have_tag assert_select wrapper outside RSpec on Rails (but in a Rails project) so I can use it to check text strings. Has anyone managed this? Thanks Ashley -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Hi everyone, I am relatively new to rspec and I am running into a wall in testing my views. I have a RESTful resource Contracts with a nested resource of Line_items. I am trying to figure out how to test the "edit" form of the Line_items. What complicates this is the nested routing and how to account for it, and that there is a partial form (_form.haml) that both the edit.haml and

I was planning on using a fixture within a description that didn''t modify the fixture, so I put it in a before(:all) block: describe "Customer", "xml" do fixtures :customers before(:all) do one = customers(:one) end # ... As a result, I got this message: 1) NoMethodError in ''Customer xml before(:all)'' You have a nil object when you

False Positives I just discovered how easy it was to create a false positive when I, trying my first RSpec test, did this: ob.should eql?(''foo'') instead of: ob.should eql(''foo'') or: ob.should == ''foo'' As far as I can see, this is roughly equivalent to: ob.should false Neither eql?(''foo'') nor false causes the spec

So, having gotten a story (i.e. Story Runner) working (runs in NetBeans and using ''ruby path/to/story.rb''), I''m looking to see how I''d integrate that with our build. Am I right in assuming that there''s no Rake integration yet, or a report? I couldn''t see any. As far as I can see, "rake spec" doesn''t run or report on my

Hi folks, I''m trying out this idea of "outside-in" and writing specs for my views first. Being a person who generally starts with some scribbles of a user interface and moves right to models, this has yet to be fun, but I''m giving it a shot. My question: I''m trying to specify that an index page should show a list of things, each with a link to a delete

Good morning (Pacific Time). I have a controller action that, as a side-effect, sends an email to an administrator. I want it to do something like this: specify "when someone successfully signs up, an email should be sent to the administrator with the person''s contact page" do post :signup, {...lots o'' params} response should_be success #

Having used JUnit and Test::Unit, I''m quite used to having the ability to insert a failure message, which helps when tests fail. For instance, the example RSpec that is generated for a model class specifies that the model class is valid. Assuming this were supposed to be true, and it failed, I''ve now got to duplicate the code in the test in order to find out why it

I''d like to write a test of a REST service wherein XML is submitted as the request entity. In Test::Unit on Rails, this seems to be possible in an integration test, but not in a functional test. RSpec uses the Rails functional test framework, as far as I can tell, so it suffers the same result; it tries to symbolize the keys of the ''parameters'' hash, except the

I always assumed have_tag was part of rspec, but it''s not in rspec 2, and looking now I don''t see it in rspec 1 either. Webrat defines it, but that seems like a coincidence (I tried requiring webrat/core/matchers to no avail). Is it depricated, not yet implemented, or does it work for everyone else? My project is from scratch, rspec-rails 2b13, using generated spec_helper.

Hi I''ve got an RJS spec that is failing. It looks like this: specify "should have list of prooducts for particular provider" do @provider.products.each do |product| response.should have_tag("#product_name_#{product.id}", :text => "#{product.name}") end end It fails when it renders a partial containing this: <td

Sorry, lots of questions these days. Is there a normal approach for preconditions? In JUnit, I might put a few assertions in the setUp() just to make sure that the test ''data'' I''ve created meets expectations before going to test it. So, for instance, I''ve got an object that is audited using acts_as_audited and I''d like to test the XML that results

Hi, I''ve been trying to find an answer for this problem in the last couple hours, but I think no discussion was about this exact same thing. So here it goes, hope someone can help. I''m trying to spec a view which works correctly on the browser, but that generates the following error when I run "rake spec:views". ActionView::TemplateError in ''/survey/show

Hi! I wonder does anybody planning to go beyond the default html formatter/report? The current html report is nice and green but what about to go a little silly and enable also user input. For example to let customer to add a new pending spec, comments etc. I feel it might be mentally easier for some customers to jump into spec world when it is possible to give input at "the same

I''m trying to write my first view spec; I''ve done some controller specs with integrated views, but thought that isolating the views for some of these tests might be nice. So I wrote this: > describe PlayerContainer, "show" do > > PARENT_ID = 12 > CHILD_NAME = ''Child Name'' > PARENT_NAME = ''Parent Name'' > >

Hey list, I''m refactoring some much-used functionality into a common_steps step group. Methods like this are in there: steps_for :common do Given "a number of existing $types?" do |type| @initial_item_count = type.singularize.classify.constantize.count end When "the user adds an invalid $type" do |type| post