Lots of good proposals here. I would at least like to chime in that I agree with the goals as set out by Wincent below, and from a readability standpoint have preferred the API as suggested by Trevor.
-Michael On Jul 7, 11:25 pm, Wincent Colaiuta <w...@wincent.com> wrote: > > So, when I see this kind of thing, I think _what_ are we trying to achieve in > ourroutingspecs and _why_? At least for me, the answers are: > > 1. Confirm: To confirm that the routes I've defined actually do what I > think they do > > 2. Describe: To serve as a complete, explicit, readable specification of > the behavior I expect from my routes > > And finally: > > 3. That the Railsroutingcode actually works as advertised > > This last one is a bit dubious, but the truth is the Rails 3 router is a > complete re-write and bugs in it and incompatibilities with the old router > are being found and squished constantly. An exhaustive set ofroutingspecs can > definitely help to uncover undiscovered edge cases. > > So, bearing in mind those goals, what I actually need from RSpec in order to > achieve them is: > > - most importantly, a way of asserting that a user action (eg. HTTP verb + > path + params) gets routed to a given controller + action with certain > additional parameters (ie. a wrapper for assert_recognizes) > > - less importantly, a way of asserting that a set of params (action, > controller, additional params) generates a particular path (ie. a wrapper for > assert_generates); this is less important for me because in practice close to > all (98%) of my URL generation is done with named URL helpers, and I can test > those explicitly if I want > > - as syntactic sugar, a way of combining the above two assertions into one > for those cases where the mapping is perfectly bidirectional (ie. a wrapper > for assert_routing). > > With these tools I can achieve pretty much everything I need: not only test > that user actions end up hitting the right spots in my application, but also > specify clearly and explicitly what I expect those mappings to be. > > So for me, anything else doesn't really help me achieve my goals. The > "have_resource(s)" matcher, for instance, doesn't help me and in fact > actually undermines my goal of providing a complete and explicit > specification of how my routes work. > > The "recognize" and "generate" matchers you suggest obviously are "on target" > to help me fulfill my goals. Of these, the "recognize" one is the most > important one though. > > Of the "match" and "get" matchers you suggest, seeing as they both wrap the > same thing (assert_routing), one of them would have to go. I'd probably ditch > "match" because it is just a repetition of the router DSL method of the same > name, and my goal here isn't just to repeat that DSL in my specs. > > In fact, if you look at my most important goal -- asserting that a user > action (HTTP verb, path, params) hits a specific end point (controller + > action + additional params) -- you'll understand why, in my proposal, all of > my specifications start with "get"/"post" etc followed by path, params and > then controller/action. It's not just for resonance with other parts of RSpec > like where we use "get" etc in controller specs. > > But if the goal is just to wrap the 3 Rails assertions as faithfully as > possible, then you wind up with a different proposal. What David has posted > is probably the closest to this goal. > > And if the goal is make the specs map as closely as possible onto the > language of config/routes.rb, then you wind up with a different proposal > still... (ie. the one you just made). > > So, I guess what I'm saying here is I'd like to hear _what_ people are > wanting to achieve in theirroutingspecs and _why_; and then to ask what kind > of means RSpec should provide to best achieve those goals. > > Cheers, > Wincent > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-us...@rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
