On 9/3/07, Peter Marklund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There's a very useful guideline in TDD that says "test YOUR code, not > > everyone elses." The validation library we're testing here is > > ActiveRecord's. It's already tested (we hope!). > > Personally, I don't have the courage to assume Rails code is always > working.
The school of thought that says "test your code" addresses this issue as well - you can have examples that specifically test assumptions in an API - but then they should be separated from your other examples (as they are not testing your code). Check out JUnit Recipes by J.B. Rainsberger. > I know from experience it doesn't always work although it is > quite solid in general. The Rails code has been tested but not in > conjunction with my particular apps. I also want to test my > assumptions of how the Rails API works, maybe it doesn't work as I > think. Again - JB calls these "learning tests." > Having tests/specs that cover Rails interaction with my app, > which higher level tests of course naturally do (system/integration > tests), gives me much more courage to upgrade Rails as well. Agreed. And Story Runner is the perfect place for these. Cheers, David > > Peter > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users@rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
