On Sunday, July 29, 2012 4:29:59 PM UTC-4, Aaron Patterson wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 11:54:33AM -0400, Matt Jones wrote: 
> > 
> > On Jul 28, 2012, at 11:44 PM, Aaron Patterson wrote: 
> > 
> > > In the case a developer has not constructed a controller, the setup 
> > > method of ActionController::TestCase will attempt to construct a 
> > > controller object.  If it cannot construct a controller object, it 
> > > silently fails. 
> > > 
> > > I added a warning in this case, and I'd like to eventually deprecate 
> the 
> > > behavior.  I can't think of why anyone would want to use 
> > > ActionController::TestCase and *not* test a controller.  Does anyone 
> > > know a reason *why* we would do this? 
> > > 
> > >  
> https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/master/actionpack/lib/action_controller/test_case.rb#L534-542
>  
> > 
> > Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't the call to 
> setup_controller_request_and_response happen *before* any user-defined 
> setup methods get called? In that case, it's intended to let users do 
> unusual things (that don't set, or set to nonsense, controller_class) and 
> then set up their own controller object. 
>
> Yes, I think that is true.  However, there is the `controller_class=` 
> and the `tests` class method that you can use when AC::TC cannot intuit 
> the 
> controller class from your test class name: 
>
>   
> https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/master/actionpack/lib/action_controller/test_case.rb#L390-393
>  
>
> If you needed a dynamic anonymous controllers, you could just implement 
> the `controller_class` method on your test case, e.g.: 
>
>   class FooTest < ActionController::TestCase 
>     def self.controller_class 
>       # new anonymous subclass on every test 
>       Class.new(ActionController::Base) 
>     end 
>   end 
>
> > There are some related commits that seem relevant: 
> > 
> > 
> https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/13950a8cc94ab93bb20976f2797b1df9740849b3
>  
> > 
> https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/ee82e1c3015392c87c88ee32003763210a75d1ec
>  
> > 
> https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/529a3ee50eeb7db5a78afeb5da38fd71b42e7ea2
>  
> > 
> > I'd say there's a good chance that all of these changes are intended to 
> support doing things like this: 
> > 
> > 
> https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-rails/docs/controller-specs/anonymous-controller
>  
>
> I could be mistaken, but I don't think RSpec uses AC::TC behavior 
> methods.  Maybe Mr. Chelimsky can enlighten us. 
>
> > by handling the case where the controller-under-test isn't a named 
> constant. 
>
> As I demoed above, the controller doesn't need to be a named constant, 
> you just need to implement the correct factory method.  So I'm still at 
> a loss why we would want to support "unconstructable" controllers. 
>
> The reason I want to get rid of this code is because there is currently 
> a code path that allows `@controller` to be nil during the test run. 
> This is annoying because there are *many* methods[1] that depend on this 
> instance variable, yet we cannot guarantee that the instance variable is 
> set. 
>
> If this is truly something that is for RSpec only, then perhaps this 
> behavior should be pushed to RSpec rather than maintained in Rails. 
>
> 1. 
> https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/master/actionpack/lib/action_controller/test_case.rb#L414-525
>  


rspec-rails overrides the `controller_class` method, providing its own 
based on the object passed to `describe` [1]. For anonymous controller 
specs, it generates a subclass of ApplicationController (by default) or a 
user defined base class [2].

I'm not clear on what you're proposing to change, but as long as Rails 
continues to generate a controller using `controller_class`, rspec-rails 
should (I think) continue to work as it does without any changes. Of 
course, I'd love to verify that if you do make any such changes.

That help?

[1] 
https://github.com/rspec/rspec-rails/blob/master/lib/rspec/rails/example/controller_example_group.rb#L17-19
[2] 
https://github.com/rspec/rspec-rails/blob/master/lib/rspec/rails/example/controller_example_group.rb#L56-74


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby 
on Rails: Core" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/rubyonrails-core/-/csUWt_zSGkMJ.
To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.

Reply via email to