Hey guys,
we just found out by accident that rspec seems to apply a pretty
confusing mechanism to ensure that a certain template is rendered.
To clarify, consider this standard controller spec:
# working
it 'GET edit' do
get :edit, :id => '37'
response.should render_template(:edit)
end
So far, so good. Now to the surprising part:
# NOT working
it 'GET edit' do
get :edit, :id => '37'
response.should render_template(:eda)
end
# -> here's the surprise: working
it 'GET edit' do
get :edit, :id => '37'
response.should render_template(:edi)
end
Apparently rspec uses a pretty generous pattern matching to ensure
that a certain template is rendered.
If I had to guess, I'd say that's because rspec wants to ignore path /
namespacing / different file endings (html.haml, html.erb and so on).
I still think this approach is suboptimal for two reasons:
1.) It violates the principle of least suprise, this behaviour is more
like "the biggest surprise possible" - who would have thought that
example nr.3 is working?
2.) I can easily imagine a situation where 2 or more actions start
with the same letters. In this case, what would happen if you changed
the "render_template"-call (i.e. shortening the template name) and
remove one action.
Wouldnt the specs still be green although one view would be completely
missing?
2 questions:
1.) Is this a bug or a feature?
2.) Why not change the pattern matching that it still ignores paths
and file endings, but at least tries to match the expected template
exactly to the rendered template?
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
