similar to: Specifying that code is called in a block

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

So, I''ve been following the recommendations for controller specs here: http://blog.davidchelimsky.net/articles/2006/11/09/tutorial-rspec-stubs-and-mocks Most notably: a single expectation per specify block; the setup block contains only stubs; mock expectations each get their own specify block. (I''m still using 0.8, so I haven''t gotten the describe/it goodness yet.) I

Hi I''ve been doing this a while now. If I have a class that responds to : [], and all I''m interested in stubbing is that method, then instead of using a mock I just create a hash. (Similarly, you could create an array when you are testing an Enumerable object.) Example from code I just worked on, where uses MigrationGraph#[] looks up graph vertices by name:

Hi, I have this setup block: setup do session[:login] = ''jhughes'' @user = mock("user") User.stub!(:find).and_return(@user) @params = {:cn => "Bilbo Baggins", :telephoneNumber => "416-277-4418", :mail => "bilbo at baggins.com"} end And then this spec: specify "should update and save the

As things stand now, the following will all pass: true.should_be true "true".should_be true "false".should_be true 3.should_be true etc My feeling is that "should_be true" should only pass if it returns boolean true even though ruby says that non-nil/non-false is true. Anybody else? David

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

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

I''m working with a has_many :through association, where a Member has_many Projects through ProjectViewers. The problem I''m running into is that Rails doesn''t load the association so line (3) fails until I explicitly access a member of the collection (in this case, I iterated it). Is there a better way? Thanks, Steve 1. assigns[:member].should_not_be_nil 2.

Mike Williams contributed a patch to support arbitrary comparisons. This is now in the trunk and will be part of the next release. So you will now be able to do this: result.should_be < 5 result.should_be >= 7 It also supports alternate syntax for should_be, should_match result.should == 3 result.should =~ /regex/ Personally, I prefer should_be and should_match in these cases, as I think

Hi to everyone, I''m an RSpec, and BDD in general, newbie so in order to learn I have chosen to use my personal website as a tesbed. I''m having difficulties juggling with mocks, and in particula with the following code. Here''s the controller action: def create @album = Album.new(params[:album]) if @album.save flash[:notice] = "album saved"

Has the should_... syntax changed? I''m getting errors when running the following: should_render(:index) should_be_valid should_not_be_valid should_respond_to should_be should_render I thought the syntax changed to something like the following: obj.should render(:index) but this doesn''t seem to work. Scott

Hi guys, I''ve just been reading Martin Fowler''s article re mock versus stubbing<http://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html>where he compares traditional TDD testing techniques with mock based testing. I''d be interested in comments from a ruby on rails perspective in terms of this and Mocha? For example: a) Do you see Mocha as a robust way to test Ruby

@settings.should allow_publish_ip("127.0.0.1") fails with undefined method `allow_publish_ip'' for #<#<Class:0x2f8fd48>:0x2f5a968> @settings.should_allow_publish_ip("127.0.0.1") works fine This is rspec 0.8.2. http://rspec.rubyforge.org/documentation/expectations.html says that matching arbitrary predicates is deprecated and to see

I wanted to fix some things up in the trunk, so I set up the databases and ran the unit tests. A bunch fail for postgres, and even more error out. I know of two postgresql adapters: postgres-pr and ruby-postgres. Strangely, they each fail different tests. So if I want to fix things up, which one should I be using? For that matter, which adapter should I be using for production? Finding out

Am 18.07.2018 um 14:17 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:49:39 +0200 > Anton Blau via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > Hmm, your REALM is 'SMBDOMAIN.FILE.DUCK' but your dnsdomain appears to > be just 'duck' > > Rowland > I read https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Active_Directory_Naming_FAQ - but I am not sure that my

I don''t even know how it''d be possible (through Selenium?), but I want it. I want to see if my stupid CSS hacks break. I want to say: describe "#nav-column" do body = something("#body-column") it "should line up at the top" do dom[:top].should_be == body.dom[:top] end it "should always be to the right" do

Am 19.07.2018 um 10:03 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2018 23:21:41 +0200 > Anton Blau via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > >> Am 18.07.2018 um 14:17 schrieb Rowland Penny via samba: >> > It is touched on here: > > https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Setting_up_Samba_as_an_Active_Directory_Domain_Controller#Parameter_Explanation >

I''m trying to spec out a render partial collection but I get the following error 2) NoMethodError in ''/games/_game.rhtml should show game name'' undefined method `body'' for #<#<Class:0x316580c>:0x2f1154c> /Volumes/EXTERNAL/web/omenking.ca/vendor/plugins/rspec_on_rails/lib/spec/rails/matchers/have_text.rb:12:in `matches?''

Hi folks. So I''m using mocha on a ruby project, and I really like it. One thing I''ve noticed is that it can be a bit "surprising" when I''m mocking methods that don''t exist on an object, and I think there''s an easyish fix. At the moment, you use sheep = mock() to create a mock sheep. What I''d like to do is something like sheep =

Hi everybody, Small problem. I get this error: undefined method `all_categories'' for BlogCategory:Class Code of BlogCategory class is: class BlogCategory < ActiveRecord::Base has_and_belongs_to_many :blog_posts validates_presence_of :name validates_uniqueness_of :name # Return all categories ordered by name def all_categories find :all, :order =>