similar to: typos in a tutorial page

Hi, I keep facing problems with autotest, and I don''t know what''s happening in the background, is there anyway to know what''s happening while testing? Example: @user = User.new @user.email = "testcom" @user.errors.on(:email).should_not be_empty ...throws error failure - You have a nil object when you didn''t expect it! - You might have expected an

We''d like to get some feedback on RSpec 0.9 before we start pushing out releases via Rubyforge''s gem server and update the website. We have therefore made the first beta of 0.9 available - both prepackaged and tagged in subversion (see below). RSpec 0.9 introduces a new API for expectations, which essentially means that your underscores go away (there has been other discussions

A couple months ago I asked how stories and specs might impact each other. [1] If you look at Dan North''s example of what''s in a story [2], and you imagine using the spec framework to drive the design, you can probably imagine a significant bit of overlap in the two. Is that a bad thing? I''m not sure. It has made me a bit uncomfortable though, and I''ve

Is there any way to do foo.should (be_nil || be_empty) in rspec. Thanks in advance -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20081104/ee43c9c9/attachment.html>

There''s another quirk I wanted to bring up. It''s about the failure message with should_equal and should_be. x.should_equal 2 a.should_not_be nil When they fail they yield messages like: 1 should equal 2 nil should not be nil When I''m caught off guard, which can be often, these messages confuse me. 1 should equal 2? No it shouldn''t. nil should not be

On 16 Apr 2009, at 11:22, Joaquin Rivera Padron wrote: > at the moment I do it this way, hiding the complexity out of the > steps: > > Then /^I should see the people search form$/ do > people_search_form_exists > end > > Then /^I should not see the people search form$/ do > people_search_form_exists "not" > end > > and then the method: > >

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

I''m having a problems mocking successive return values. I don''t know if I''m doing something wrong or if this is a limitation of rspec mocks. Any ideas of what I may be doing wrong? I''m trying to test the generate_quote_number method. It generates a quote number, looks to see if it is in the db already. If it is, it calls itself to try again. I want

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 #

I''m trying out rspec_on_rails with a very simple test: ... specify "product name should be ''test''" do Product.find( :all ).first.name.should_equal ''test'' end ... with this fixture: first: id: 1 name: test When I run it: .F 1) ''Given a generated product_spec.rb with fixtures loaded product name should be

Dear spec''ers, As many of you already know, we''re gearing up for a pretty big 0.8 release of RSpec in the next couple of weeks. I''m writing in advance because I want to give you a heads up about upcoming changes and how they may impact your existing specs. Two important things to note first: 1. We will provide a translator that you''ll be able to use to

All, Inspired by a conversation on the mocha list, I added the ability to mix stubs w/ mocks on the same methods. Here''s what it allows: context "a mock" do specify "can stub! and mock the same message" do mock = mock("stubbing mock") mock.stub!(:msg).and_return(:stub_value) mock.should_receive(:msg).with(:arg).and_return(:mock_value)

RSpeckers: I went with RSpec instead of Systir because I downloaded and installed the former first. (I know that''s not exactly a ringing endorsement! ;-) I want to compete with FIT and Fitnesse, like this: http://www.zeroplayer.com/cgi-bin/wiki?TestFlea#tropism (Click on a Green Bar to distend one test case.) I want a domain-specific language in the parchment-colored area on the

All, If you look at http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6760&group_id=797&atid=3149 you''ll see that Chad (the submitter) found the source of the bug. Unfortunately, the source of *this* bug is the *solution* to a *previous bug* in which Rails was replacing RSpec''s method missing with its own. When we settled on underscores, my one reservation was

Hello guys, Is there any way to match a render :nothing? I coudn''t find any way to do this so i''ve just changed my controllers to do a "head :ok", but it would be nice to know if there is any other way :) -- Maur?cio Linhares http://alinhavado.wordpress.com/ (pt-br) | http://blog.codevader.com/ (en) Jo?o Pessoa, PB, +55 83 8867-7208

Hi I''ve come up with a problem using RSpec on a model class in my rails app. I wanted to test that some data was being cached for some calculations, so rather than do state-based testing I tried to specify that the method that fetches the data should NOT be called when I call the calculate method. However in doing so I have to simulate the return value, which is about 27

All, Based mostly on the earlier thread on "should_be", we have introduced a new branch called should_be_working_like_ruby with the new proposed handling for equality. Per the CHANGES file in that branch (rev 896): ============================================ IMPORTANT NOTE: THIS RELEASE IS NOT 100% BACKWARDS COMPATIBLE TO 0.6.x This release changes the way RSpec handles equality.

I sent this earlier under with the subject "artificial sugar causes cancer" and I think some spam filters ate it. Here it is again: ====================================== All, If you look at http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6760&group_id=797&atid=3149 you''ll see that Chad (the submitter) found the source of the bug. Unfortunately, the source

Hi, Is there already a plugin for RadRails that would support RSpec ? Thx Julien -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20070411/1c9aca29/attachment.html

Here is the code in question: describe UsersController do render_views … … describe "POST to ''create'' action" do describe "failure" do before(:each) do @attr = { :name => '''', :email => '''', :password => '''', :password_confirmation =>