Re: [rspec-users] Can I set an expectation that a method invokes super?
On 28 Jan 2010, at 17:49, Rick DeNatale wrote: Not sure if I can easily do this Just ran into a bug in a rails app where ApplicationController overrides rescue_action_in_public leading to the error page not being displayed. The fix was to call super at the end of the method. I'd like to write a spec to ensure that this doesn't regress, but my imagination is failing me as to how to do it. Two thoughts, one not very helpful, the other hopefully more so. My approach with this area has been to ignore the mechanics of error catching in controllers, to steer clear of rescue_action_in_public in apps - using rescue_from instead - and using a custom matcher to check that particular controllers declare that they rescue particular errors. To ensure that, in practice, the right stuff happens I use Cucumber to check that in a 404 type situation the right stuff happens across the whole stack. HTH Matt -- Matt Patterson | Design Code matt at reprocessed org | http://www.reprocessed.org/ ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
[rspec-users] Can I set an expectation that a method invokes super?
Not sure if I can easily do this Just ran into a bug in a rails app where ApplicationController overrides rescue_action_in_public leading to the error page not being displayed. The fix was to call super at the end of the method. I'd like to write a spec to ensure that this doesn't regress, but my imagination is failing me as to how to do it. Any ideas? -- Rick DeNatale Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Re: [rspec-users] Can I set an expectation that a method invokes super?
On Jan 28, 2010, at 5:49 pm, Rick DeNatale wrote: I'd like to write a spec to ensure that this doesn't regress, but my imagination is failing me as to how to do it. Any ideas? Yes: don't use inheritance for implementations. The bug you describe is arguably a violation of the Liskov Substitution Principle, ie the derived class changed the functionality it inherited in a way that broke the expected behaviour of all derived classes. If you can write a spec (possibly shared examples) that defines the contract you expect *all* controllers to follow - eg display an error page in this situation - you can run that against all your controllers. Checking that you call `super` doesn't necessarily give you this security. If you want to post #rescue_action_in_public there might be another way, depending on your code. I'm no Rails guru though. BTW if this sounds like a rant, it is :) I am constantly stamping my feet over the way controllers in Rails, Merb etc are implemented, as they make writing specs extremely difficult. Let me know if this is not clear as I've thrown the email together in a hurry before going home for the night... Ashley -- http://www.patchspace.co.uk/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran ___ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
