Out of curiosity what do you think are downsides of freeze_time? I like to use it when testing datetime.
On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 9:51 AM Jon Rowe <m...@jonrowe.co.uk> wrote: > I don’t think it has ever been formalised, but the consensus of the RSpec > team since I joined has been that `rspec-rails` is a thin wrapper around > Rails test helpers bringing them into RSpec, thus it mostly handles > bringing in the same or equivalent modules as Rails, configuring `spec` > defaults instead of `test`, and matchers for equivalence with the Rails > testing assertions. That has always been the main stay of the support. > > For the case of the linked issue, I think my understanding at the time was > that this was an optional part of Rails test helpers, if thats not the case > it would be a good candidate for bringing in automatically despite any > personal opinions on my part. > > Updating the read me is certanly something we can look at doing. > > Cheers > Jon > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2023, at 5:56 PM, 'Jason Karns' via rspec wrote: > > This second-level question came to mind as I did some digging for > documentation in rspec-rails for how the core team determines what > rspec-rails supports and what it doesn't. > > The initial question is regarding whether rspec-rails should expose > support for Rails' TimeHelpers as a first-class module, this thread isn't > about that, though. Before opening an issue on the github repo, I wanted to > see if there was any documentation that would pre-emptively clarify that > this kind of feature request would be received well or whether it was > already in contrast to how rspec-rails sees itself. > > From my point of view as a _user_ of rspec-rails, my guess at rspec-rails' > goal is to: make it possible to use Rails' own testing helpers and > terminology within rspec. Wherever a rails test-type exists, there is a > corollary in the rspec world (helpers that Rails exposes to a Mailer > TestCase for instance, become matchers in :mailer type specs). More broadly > than simply type-specific helpers, I would _presume_ that it is a goal of > rspec-rails that virtually all Rails helpers have a counterpart in rspec in > whatever way makes sense. For example, file_fixture helpers exist and are > configured per spec/* instead of test/*; time helpers can be included and > used as they would in a rails minitest suite. > > My reason for starting this thread is to ask if this "goal" of rspec-rails > has ever been written or documented explicitly. A small blurb in a readme > or contributing doc would be beneficial. This thread ( > https://github.com/rspec/rspec-rails/issues/2263) on rails' time helpers > in particular seems to imply that there are other "design or architecture" > guidelines that factor into rspec-rails' direction; such as whether or not > a particular feature in Rails' test helpers contradicts the testing > philosphy of rspec's core team. > > The comment in question from Jon Rowe: "I'm unsure I want to add this as a > default, as I don't personally believe freezing time is a good idea." I > might be reading between the lines too much, but this seems to indicate > that rspec-rails priority isn't _first_ to faithfully port (as much as > possible of) rails test helpers into rspec but in fact has testing opinions > of its own that rails' test helpers should align with before being ported > into rspec-rails. > > It is this fine line that I think would be beneficial if documented > somewhere. My own preference of a mission statement of sorts would be that > any/all rails helpers should be (as nearly as possible) exposed within > rspec; with the end result being that any developer comfortable in a > minitest rails suite could assume to find corollaries in a similar rspec > rails suite. > > Has this kind of thing been discussed before? > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "rspec" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rspec+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rspec/c0b89ee1-ce36-4d6f-84e5-d330f81bb702n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rspec/c0b89ee1-ce36-4d6f-84e5-d330f81bb702n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "rspec" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to rspec+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rspec/df0e021b-0c3f-42b7-8553-680832b2c59e%40app.fastmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rspec/df0e021b-0c3f-42b7-8553-680832b2c59e%40app.fastmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rspec" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rspec+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rspec/CA%2Bo2VULeANDKz2q1VtT2iTKRW%2BP4hDJT93hKcWk4G3dmDv1iDw%40mail.gmail.com.
