On 8/24/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > describe Widget, "class" do > it "should provide a list of widgets sorted alphabetically" do > Widget.should_receive(:find).with(:order => "name ASC") > Widget.find_alphabetically > end > end > > You're correct that the refactoring requires you to change the > object-level examples, and that is something that would be nice to > avoid. But also keep in mind that in java and C# people refactor > things like that all the time without batting an eye, because the > tools make it a one-step activity. Refactoring is changing the design > of your *system* without changing its behaviour. That doesn't really > fly all the way down to the object level 100% of the time. > > WDYT?
I think that example is fine up until the model spec. The find_alphabetically example should hit the db, imo. With the current spec there's no way to know whether find_alphabetically actually works or not. You're relying on knowledge of ActiveRecord here, trusting that the arguments to find are correct. What I've found when I write specs is that I discover new layers of services until eventually I get to a layer that actually does something. When I get there, it's important to have specs that describe what it does, not how it does it. In the case of find_alphabetically we care that it returns the items in alphabetical order. Not that it makes a certain call to the db. Pat _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
