similar to: Rails trunk breakages

After a long week agonizing over a scheduling library, and then specing it out rather quickly, I''ve got some work I''m pretty happy with. As a contrast to Test::Unit, I like the way RSpec spreads my attention around the codebase while I concentrate on implementing specific behaviours. In Test::Unit, I tend to write tests around the private methods of the object under test. I

I spent the last couple of days getting my sea legs with Rails and RSpec. I''d been waiting til things seemed calmer before jumping in, and I''m overall very happy with my experience so far. My only real annoyance so far has been forgetting to call "do_post" or "do_create" from my specify blocks. My mocks don''t get the calls they want, and it usually

The new "pending" example feature reminds me of a feature I''ve been bouncing around in my head, to aid in refactoring. Often, when I''m changing existing behaviour, I know that certain aspects of the old behaviour should change. Imagine changing the "it" method to perhaps "not" or "old" or "removed"... The behaviour would be to

Mongrelians, I''ve just posted a GemPlugin for Mongrel, which allows you to skip all header and status-code generation, effectively hijacking the socket for whatever your needs are, from inside the depths of any Rails, Camping, Merb etc application. http://mongrel-raw-out.rubyforge.org/ or gem install mongrel_raw_output I use the plugin at work, where the client insists that testing

Now that I''m developing a big suite of specs, I really want to run Heckle and see how well I''ve done. Using r1359, when I run: spec spec/models/metadata_report_spec.rb --heckle MetadataReport the result is just to run the specs once and then exit, as though I hadn''t mentioned Heckle. I started looking though rspec to figure out why, but it''s late, so I should

RSpecrs, I''ve been running into some trouble lately when passing mock objects into rich views. Either I have to obscure my specs by stubbing every method the view would call on my object, or I have to resort to trickery like stubbing ActionController#render, which is also less than ideal. The solution I''ve some up with is a variant on the :null_object option that can be passed

I wrote this abomination just now, and wonder if anyone else has had experience with the pattern behind it. In short, I''m specing an after_create hook on an ActiveRecord model, that calls a bunch of private methods. Instead of stubbing all those private methods (which is verboten anyway, as well as impossible because creating the object which owns those methods is what I''m

Hi All, I am inserting data from one table to another by using following method @data=RoyaltyReportFiles.find_by_sql("insert into royalty_reports (artist_name, album_name) select artist_name, album_name from temp_royalty_reports where id=328417") it saves the data into royalty_reports table but it gives following error and application crashes. i am using rails 1.2.5 You have a nil

I''m curious, Christian Neukirchen has released test/unit[1] that seems to mirror much of RSpec, but built on Test::Unit, so in some ways less brittle from a Rails-integration perspective, and also allowing you to mix the two together as appropriate. So, has anyone made an informed comparison? I''m new enough that I don''t really know the finer points yet. The syntax is

My problem has been listed here: http://railsforum.com/viewtopic.php?pid=25439#p25439 Don''t think it would be required to completely re-type it here :) Thanks! -- -Daniel Fischer http://danielfischer.com - Geek Blog http://abigfisch.com - Portfolio http://writersbeat.com - Writing Community

Hi All I''m having some problems running my view specs when using simply_helpful. I have it semi-working via the following: module SimplyHelpfulHelper def self.included(base) base.send :include, SimplyHelpful::RecordIdentificationHelper base.send :include, SimplyHelpful::RecordTagHelper end end context "The index template" do setup do @shift =

Am I correct in remembering that autotest (with Test::Unit) would rerun all the tests if a subset of the tests passed? If so, shouldn''t this behaviour also be present in rspec''s autotest library? Scott

Is anyone using RSpec with RESTful rails apps? In my rails controllers I check request.respond_to? and render different views accordingly. I noticed that the get method in the rails plugin doesn''t accept headers: controller_mixin.rb line 92 def get(action, parameters = nil) @request.env[''REQUEST_METHOD''] = ''GET'' process action,

Is anyone using rspec with autotest? Scott

Hello - I''m currently trying to write some specs for my rails views. My views depend upon the restful authentication plugin method logged_in? Like so, <% if logged_in? %> <ul id="product-admin-nav"> <dd><%= link_to "create a new product", new_product_url %></dd> </ul> <% end %> However, when I have the following

Hi all, We''re thinking about retiring the test2spec translation tool because it''s becoming a maintenance problem. Is anyone using it? Would anyone miss it if it went away? Aslak

Hi, I have a project that I had running under rspec 0.6.x and recently upgraded to 0.7.2. I am trying to isolate my controllers from the database as I go through and change all the specs to run under 0.7.2. I am having a problem where I need to make the create! method return the mocked object as well as raise RecordInvalid exception. Is this at all possible? I use the rescue statement in my

I am testing a resource called venue in this piece of code (generated using script/rspec_resource) ==================== context "Requesting /venues using POST" do controller_name :venues setup do @mock_venue = mock(''Venue'') @mock_venue.stub!(:save).and_return(true) @mock_venue.stub!(:to_param).and_return(1) Venue.stub!(:new).and_return(@mock_venue)

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