similar to: Specify attr_protected

Hello, I''m currently stunk on this issue for few days and I do not know how to get it fixed. The system always raises this error message : order is closed and here is my order.rb: class Order < ActiveRecord::Base include ActiveMerchant::Billing before_validation :set_status attr_protected :id, :customer_ip, :status, :error_message, :updated_at, :created_at attr_accessor

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

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

I''ve been puzzling over how to test that attr_accessible has been set for the correct columns; but the tests I''ve come up with so far seem to fail to fail when I expect. I came across this old message from this list: http://www.mail-archive.com/rspec-users at rubyforge.org/msg01570.html Which seemed like a plausible example, but my attempt (modeled on the example)

I''m using RSpec on Rails and would like to clean up the backtraces, so I went looking for an RSpec equivalent to ThoughtBot''s Quiet Backtrace gem<http://thoughtbot.com/projects/quietbacktrace>. I found Spec::Runner::QuietBacktraceTweaker in the RDOCS, but I can''t figure out how to use it. Can I add something to spec_helper.rb that will utilize

Now that RSpec is nearing 1 dot oh, are there any plans to implement an integration testing equivalent in RSpec On Rails?

I just read ''Mocks Aren''t Stubs'' and was intrigued by the notion of ''outside-in'' TDD. As a Rails developer, I''m curious if others are employing this method when developing Rails applications using RSpec. Is it common practice (or even practical) to drive the development of a Rails app by starting with view specs, then controller specs, then

how would you check for a range using rspec? person.password.range.should == Range.new(5..40) <- this doesn''t work -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20070527/4d8cb007/attachment-0001.html

I''m wanting to write a spec that a model is applying an :order option to a find call, but I don''t want to completely specify all of the find parameters. So I want to write something like this, say in a controller spec User.should_receive(:find).with(:all, hash_with_at_least(:order => ''user.name ASC'')) get ''index'', :sort =>

I found this: controller.expect_render(:partial => ''thing'', :collection => things).once but I am trying to expect_render twice in my view spec: template.expect_render(:partial => ''order_details'').twice This doesn''t work as the template.expect_render call seems to be returning an array. Is it possible to expect the rendering of a partial

Hi, Googling ''RSpec describe scope'' didn''t yield much, so apologies if this question has been dealt with. It seem well known that a ruby class is ''visible'' between describes, and if this is a problem then you should use some counter as prefix or suffix: ''class Item_001; ... end'' Is there any work underway, or sheduled release where

(I posted this as a bug in GitHub (https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/7018), but then someone there told me I should post it here, so here it is.) If you set attr_accessible on some properties in an ActiveRecord-descended class, and then attr_protected on others - the class becomes ''default-open'' - if any properties are missed or added later, they will be accessible by

I''m currently taking a Rails project management app I built when learning Rails and adding specs to it. During the course of building the app the requirement that project should be archiveable was added. So a project is in one of two states active or archived. This led to the creation of the following methods: Project.active_projects Project.archived_projects @project.active?

Hello Guys, Doing conversion of some test for some controllers, still with integrated views. Anyway, I have this: it "should not see Join This Group button on profile page as member" do get "show", :id => @group.id response.should be_success response.should_not have_text(/Join This Group/) end But running with spec (0.9.4), drop me the folling error:

I''m trying to spec a view but haven''t done much view specing. This view render different partials depending on authentication of the user: annon, admin, player So I I''ll write if conditionals in the view with the partials it "should render signup propaganda for annon users trying to view games" do render "/games/index.rhtml"

I''ve found myself mocking out a published api in my set-up method. This has led to some contexts having a large set-up and empty specifications. As the mocks get auto-verified, the specification blocks have nothing to do but serve as documentation. Does this sound bad? Chris

Hi I''ve spec''d a class and they pass. Now I''d like to assure that any subclass of this class also passes the same specs. Any suggestions for a clever way to handle this? I''d prefer to keep the existing specs as is (eg instead of moving everything into shared behaviors, or doing something to all the ''describe'' lines) thanks linoj

Hi I just did an update to lates trunk ================= context "Given a generated venue_spec.rb with fixtures loaded" do fixtures :venues specify "fixtures should load two Venues" do Venue.should have(2).records end end ================== gives me ========== 1) TypeError in ''Given a generated venue_spec.rb with fixtures loaded fixtures should load two

I''m trying to jump on the TDD/BDD bandwagon, but am having trouble understanding how i should mock my user. The user has a habtm relationship to a roles model (acl_system2 plugin), but I''m not sure how to tell rspec about a model. My code: describe UsersController do integrate_views before(:each) do @user = mock_model(User)

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.