similar to: client first, top down, outside in, etc with rails

How do I use the ruby debugger with a specific test (not the whole spec file)? I want to do something like this. $ rdebug spec/models/user_spec.rb -s "should error if not new_record" ____________________________________________________________________________________ Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

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

I''m trying to test a rails controller, but my mock isn''t working. Everything looks right to me. Can someone take a look at it and see if I''m missing something obvious http://pastie.caboo.se/33883 Domain.should_receive(:find_domain).once.and_return(domain) That line in the spec is failing but I don''t see why. If I comment out that line the test passes so it is

Hey all, Here''s a question for everyone: how do you keep your mocks and stubs consistent with your real objects? I''m dipping my toes into the RSpec world, and it''s absolutely delightful (running dozens of tests in less than a second is nice as well), but I''m concerned about my ability to keep the mocks in my specs consistent with the behavior of their

OK, so i''ve played a bit with mocks and mock_models in controller and view tests and i have a question. Is this statement really correct: "We highly recommend that you exploit the mock framework here rather than providing real model objects in order to keep the view specs isolated from changes to your models." (http://rspec.rubyforge.org/documentation/rails/writing/views.html

Hey all - The trunk currently supports three types of mocking/stubbing: Mock Objects (created dynamically at runtime) Partial Mocking of methods on existing classes Stubbing of methods on existing objects or classes The main difference between Partial Mocking and Stubbing is that Stubs don''t verify. I''m wondering if we really need the stubbing facility at all, given that we

One of the things that turned me on to BDD and RSpec was speccing views first, that the desired end would drive the development. In previous projects while using Test::Unit I would try to make educated guesses as to what would be needed in the model and controllers to derive the view without actually writing the view until afterwards. This is all because testing relied on each previous

I can''t figure out how to build rspec-rails as a gem when just cloned from github... there isn''t any .gemspec file or rake task that does this. Any help? -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Hello fellow RSpec users. Before you all start warming up your flame throwers please let me explain my Subject line. I''ve been working over 4 months on a large Rails project with a few other developers. Test coverage was spotty at best, though they *were* RSpec tests. One of the other developers and I had started adding more tests, mostly controller tests using the methodology

Suppose we have a method ''foo'' which internally uses another method ''bar''. Being good BDDers we mock out the ''bar'' method. After all, we only want to spec the ''foo'' method - actually running the ''bar'' method means slower, less maintainable and brittler specs. That''s why we <3 mocking,

Hello, I haven''t been able to create a controller spec. You can see the code here: http://pastie.caboo.se/67980 The error message I''m getting is: Spec::Mocks::MockExpectationError in ''PersonController should tell the Person model to create a new person on POST to create'' Mock ''person'' received unexpected message :save with (no args)

Let''s say you''re using the restful_authentication plugin. You have a model called articles. On the index action of the articlescontroller you simply want to spec out that it''ll scope the results to the ownership of the current_user. It should NOT include any articles other than the articles that user owns. How would you properly spec this out? Thanks for the help!

Hi, My application relies on request.domain for doing its job. The problem I am encountering, is that when running tests, request.domain returns "test.host", how can I change that so that it returns "mysite.com"? Thanks in advance. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

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

Consider the following method: def name_to_terminal puts "Scott Taylor" end How would I spec this out? Scott

I''m developing a rails application. I have an Order model that has_many OrderItems. I mocked the OrderItem model in my Order specs using mock_model. I thought I should focus my specs on each model and always mock associated models. In my Order model I need a way to merge OrderItems which have the same cost and same product_id. That I can spec. The other thing this merge helper

So I''ve just started working on a rails project which currently has something like 7500 LOC. All of the tests are written in Test::Unit, although the test coverage is pretty poor: rcov says that 25% of the code is covered, while rake stats shows the code to test ratio as 1:0.1 (800 lines of test code). I guess I''m wondering what would generally be advisable here. Is it

Anyone ever uses test/mocks/development && test/mocks/test directories ? If someone does, test/mocks/development doesn''t really seem like a nice place for putting development environment mocked classes. May be mocks/ should be moved to RAILS_ROOT ? Or may be it should be removed. Views ? -- Cheers! - Pratik http://m.onkey.org

This is part of a rails project. The following method is part of the Ams class (a rails model). I''m a bit unsure of the rspec/bdd way of testing this method. def persist_as_domains @current_domains.each do |d| dom = Domain.new dom.domain = d dom.source_id = 1 dom.at = Time.now dom.save end end The following is what came out when I tried to write my test. Notice

I was looking over some of my specs. I was thinking that the following: @game.should_receive(:name).and_return(''The Battle for Blaze'') @game.should_receive(:people).and_return(5000000) @game.should_receive(:activated).and_return(true) Would it look cleaner if I could do this instead? @game.should_recieve_and_return( :name => ''The Battle for Blaze''