similar to: Spec Naming (was: Rspec Brown Bag)

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.

Hello, I''m scheduled to give a rspec brown bag this Wednesday (11/22) for my company (Pivotal Computer Systems, http://www.pivotalsf.com). I did see Dave Astel''s talk as well as several of my coworkers. The developers at my workplace are experienced Agile developers. What would be some good things to focus on for this brown bag? Are there slides to presentations that would be

Not sure if this is possible currently. I have a section of code like this: ActiveRecord::Base.transaction do cow.save! duck.save! dog.save! end (Names changed to protect the innocent.) I''d like to specify that the saves run in a transaction. I can do ActiveRecord::Base.should_receive(:transaction).and_yield But is there any way to specify that the code is

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

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

@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 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

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 dig rspec and BDD, of course. I thought that Dave''s Google Video was a great intro () -- even if it was a bit heavy on theory and a bit loose on the nuts and bolts. But I don''t see anyone sufficiently answering the big question: What do you test? How do you define higher level and lower level behaviors that should have tests written for them?

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

Hey all, I am currently working on coming up w/ an easy to use, developer-centric web testing framework to test a J2EE app with. (I have 3 rails apps in production, love rspec, and am currently at a java shop). I''ve looked at selenium, and it just doesn''t seem like it is ready for prime time, and the target audience is developers. So, having said that, does the rspec

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

If I do get :index response.should_be_success I get about 20k of marshalled dumpage that starts like #<ActionController::TestResponse:0x390443c @body=\"<html><body>You are being <a href=\"http://test.host/carts/1\">redirected</a>.</body></html>\", @assigns=[], @redirected_to={:action=>\"show\", :id=>1},

Hi, Q1 - Know why rake doesn''t recognize "rake examples_with_rcov" per http://rspec.info/documentation/tools/rcov.html ? Q2 - Also when I run "rake spec:rcov" it seems to give me the same as if I just run "autotest" or "rake spec". I was expecting a heap of pointers to code I haven''t tested?

rake spec seems to work fine, but I keep getting a usage error at the end of the spec run: /usr/local/bin/ruby -I"/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-0.6.4/ lib" "/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-0.6.4/bin/spec" Usage: spec [options] (FILE|DIRECTORY|GLOB)+ --diff Show unified diff of Strings that are expected to be equal when

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 #

Hi, This is weird All my current spec examples are passing (about 750 of ''em) except a set of 6 in a specific controller spec. I get the following failure on each 6 when I run it via $ rake spec for example: --- ActionController::UnknownAction in ''MembershipsController handling PUT /project/ID/membership/N/accept should flash message'' No action responded to