Thanks, Chris, for the confirmation. I'll try to interpret the urge to test a view directly as a code smell; the point about view helper methods being testable is a good one. I'll also check out that Cells package - sounds like it may match how I'm thinking about my application more closely.
-David On Tuesday, April 12, 2011 2:06:16 AM UTC-7, Chris Kottom wrote: > > Hi David, > > Regarding your outlook on functional testing, you're basically correct. > The goal of these is to isolate the code contained in the controller layer, > and if you're following skinny-controller/fat-model best practice, these > tests will generally be pretty basic -- essentially, handle the setup and > action performed, and then check the variables set, the session and flash > state changes, the HTTP response, and the view rendered or redirect sent. > > As far as your question about testing individual partials, I don't > personally do a ton of testing on the view level as such. I _will_ scan my > views every so often to see if there's a bit of logic that would be a > candidate for testing and refactor those into helper methods wherever > possible. But as far as I know, there's not really an easy way to test > individual partials outside the context of the templates that render them > because you'd need a controller method to prepare the state and trigger the > call to render them. > > If this is something that interests you, I saw a library called Cells ( > http://cells.rubyforge.org/) a few months back that creates something like > a miniature MVC stack for view fragments. I believe it's possible to test > these independently, so you might want to check it out and see if there's > anything useful for you there. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
