similar to: Test::Unit to RSpec

How would I go about writing specs for a lib, particularly one with all protected and private methods. I''m trying to spec the AuthenticatedSystem library from the rails restful_authentication plugin: http://pastie.caboo.se/103625 Also, when you''re mocking objects, a side-effect is helping you define the api of the object. Is there a way to get all the behaviors that

Hi there all. Sorry if the question sounds silly but i''m rather new at the ''mocking'' stuff... So here is my problem (code helps more than talking): the model: class Item < ActiveRecord::Base ... has_many :images, :dependent => :destroy ... protected def validate errors.add(:images, "cannot be empty") if self.images.count end end the

What''s the status on a rake task for the story runner. If nothing is in progress, where could I start to try and build one? JD

Hey, just posting in case this is of interest. I just recently wrote a Rails plugin to convert Rails Test::Unit cases to RSpec. http://www.davidjrice.co.uk/articles/2007/8/12/ruby-on-rails-plugin- test-unit-to-rspec-converter it''s not going to work 100% in every case, but it''s really helped me convert old tests to the lovely RSpec :) Best, Dave --- David Rice

I realise that this is kind of a basic question but I''m new to rspec and still trying to work out how to do things. I''m working on a rails project that requires basecamp integration via the api, which is fairly trivial to use via the basecamp.rb wrapper: Connection: basecamp = Basecamp.new(APP_CONFIG[''api_host''], APP_CONFIG[''api_username''],

We have a custom implementation of the Mother Object idea. It''s inside of a module, basically like this: module Factory %w(account friendship person invitation message asset email_address birth).each do |klass| eval <<-EOF def self.create_#{klass}(attributes = {}) default_attributes = valid_#{klass}_attributes #{klass.camelize}.create!

How do I use the ruby debugger with a specific test (not the whole spec file)? I want to do something like this. $ rdebug spec/models/user_spec.rb -s "should error if not new_record" ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

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

Just wanted to pick some smart people about this topic: What are you guys doing to increase the speed of your specs? I''m a big fan of autotest, but right now my current project has 438 specs (for rails). Most of them are in the model, and for all of them we are hitting the database (they are more functional specs than unit-tests). The whole suite takes 112 seconds (meaning the

Just started looking at the Story Runner integration, and am converting a few Rails integration tests to get a feel for it. My integration tests relied on fixtures, and since my models have a significant amount of validation (and hence need valid data unless I save without validation), this has made setup easy. With stories however, I''m wondering what the recommended approach is.

Hi, Having just played with getting my first plain text story working, I like how it all fits together. It worked out nicely. However, I don''t feel our project needs to have stories as plain text, in fact it''s a slight hindrance for us. Is there any sensible mechanism for doing integration testing using rspec without plain text stories? Thanks, Rob

One of the things I really liked about TestNG was the grouping feature. Are there any plans for rSpec to incorporate that? Is there any way to emulate that functionality in rspec? Will.

Hi all, I know that in general, view and controller tests should be isolated, such that controller specs don''t test views etc. However, I think I''ve run into a situation that might be an exception. My controller uses render_to_string to produce a chunk of HTML that it passes to a model to be processed. The controller then redirects the user to a different page. The

Can you run rdebug on specs? I get errors when I try: $ rdebug spec ./spec/models/select_option_spec.rb ./spec: Is a directory - ./spec (Errno::EISDIR) from /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ruby-debug-0.9.3/bin/ rdebug:136:in `debug_load'' from /opt/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/ruby-debug-0.9.3/bin/ rdebug:136 from /opt/local/bin/rdebug:16:in `load''

Suppose we have a method ''foo'' which internally uses another method ''bar''. Being good BDDers we mock out the ''bar'' method. After all, we only want to spec the ''foo'' method - actually running the ''bar'' method means slower, less maintainable and brittler specs. That''s why we <3 mocking,

I figured most of it out. The Spec::Rails stuff was something in the code which has been fixed by revision 3099. The test methods partially make sense. Since the test/unit code has been integrated, methods with test in them are automatically turned into specs. However, the test? method is in a lib file that isn''t directly loaded into the specs. It is a convenience method: def

It seems to me that the RSpec bundle''s ''it'' snippet is in need of some love. By default, a newly inserted spec passes. This seems odd as it is misleading. It also makes it harder find what specs still need to be completed if you return to an RSpec module after a break. I propose that the ''it'' snippet is changed to the following: it

Hi How can I specify that a private method of a class gets called? If you run the code below, only spec (1) passes. Spec (2) is what I found causing problems in my code, and class (3) is my failed attempt to work around it. (3 really puzzles me - why is a private class method not accessible via send?) Another problem is that stub! makes public methods, which changes the behaviour of

I saw in one of Dave C.''s comments to a ticket that "our current plan is to deprecate the mocking framework." I hadn''t heard anything about that, but then again I haven''t paid super close attention to the list. Are we planning on dumping the mock framework in favor of using Mocha (or any other framework one might want to plug in?). Pat

I''m currently try to push my limits a little bit with some of my unit testing -- trying to avoid saving ActiveRecord objects to the database and take advantage of mock/stub objects. How far should I expect to get in this direction? From what I can tell, ActiveRecord seems to fight me when it comes to associations. In other words, many associations seem to require database queries.