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 in section 'assigns') I ask because this wonderful declaration passes in my view test even though the model Project doesn't have the field 'synopsis' yet: @project1 = mock_model(Project) @project1.stub!(:id).and_return(1) @project1.stub!(:name).and_return("My first project") @project1.stub!(:synopsis).and_return("This is a fantastic new project") assigns[:projects] = [EMAIL PROTECTED] it "should show the list of projects with name and synopsis" do render "/projects/index.rhtml" response.should have_tag('div#project_1_name', 'My first project') response.should have_tag('div#project_1_synopsis', 'This is a fantastic new project') response.should have_tag('div#project_2_name', 'My second project') response.should have_tag('div#project_2_synopsis', 'This is another fantastic project') response.should have_tag('a', 'This is another fantastic project') end This is handy and keeps the view test isolated from changes to your models, but is that really the point? What if someone later changes the model and updates the model tests so that they pass but do not realize that they've then broken the view? I'm sure i am simply missing the point here or not taking into account integration testing that would i expect aim to catch such changes, but somehow i want my view tests to tell me that the views are no longer going to behave as expected Thanks Andy _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
