On Jun 29, 1:46 pm, David Zhang <[email protected]> wrote: > ...That's odd. I just read The RSpec Book, and it explains how double isn't > sufficient when you're testing something related to form_for. The book, in > its example, says to use mock_model("Message").as_new_record... > and anyway in my case neither method is working. If I use mock_model, I > get > > Failure/Error: assign(:user_session, > mock_model("UserSession").as_new_record) > ArgumentError: > The mock_model method can only accept as its first argument: > * A String representing a Class that does not exist > * A String representing a Class that extends ActiveModel::Naming > * A Class that extends ActiveModel::Naming > > It received UserSession > > ...and if I use double, I get the error the book says I'd get: "undefined > method `model_name' for RSpec::Mocks::Mock:Class" > > :/ so I wonder what the best way to test form_for is now with rspec... btw > I'm using Capybara.
Didn't realize you needed it for form_for. You'll need to either use the real object, or stub out all the necessary methods yourself (or submit a patch to Authlogic to get it to conform to ActiveModel's API). Cheers, David -- 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.
