On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:20 PM, Tim Haines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Pat and David. I'm implementing paging (via will_paginate) and
> thought I should start with a story. I think I grok what you're saying Pat
> - the stories should only be looking at "externally" visible stuff - i.e.
>
On Apr 10, 2008, at 11:20 AM, Pat Maddox wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 8:20 PM, Tim Haines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Thanks Pat and David. I'm implementing paging (via will_paginate)
>> and
>> thought I should start with a story. I think I grok what you're
>> saying Pat
>> - the storie
On 10 Apr 2008, at 17:00, David Chelimsky wrote:
> otooh - having some scenarios logging in using a post and some by
> poking around under the hood creates an untested logical binding
> between the post and the poking. This has the same risk associated
> with it that raises so much concern about
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Ashley Moran
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10 Apr 2008, at 17:00, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
> > otooh - having some scenarios logging in using a post and some by
> > poking around under the hood creates an untested logical binding
> > between the post and the
On Apr 10, 2008, at 12:48 PM, Pat Maddox wrote:
> Keep in mind that not every step of every story needs to
> be a round-trip request. It's even good to write some stories that
> don't make requests at all!
I definitely agree with this, however I do see a difference between
accessing models dire
On Apr 9, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Pat Maddox wrote:
> On 4/9/08, Ashley Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On 9 Apr 2008, at 14:14, aslak hellesoy wrote:
>>
>>> Just a style comment: I usually strive for a single When (in this
>>> case
>>> Fred uploads the csv file).
>>> The other ones are Givens
Our company just had an interesting conversation around mock_model and
I want to ask the same question to this audience. When creating
mock_models what is the purpose of passing in the class constant?
user = mock_model(User)
To the best that we can tell the method mock_model doesn't actuall
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Anthony Broad-Crawford
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Our company just had an interesting conversation around mock_model and I
> want to ask the same question to this audience. When creating mock_models
> what is the purpose of passing in the class constant?
>
> use
On 10 Apr 2008, at 18:54, Pat Maddox wrote:
> stub_model, available in RSpec trunk, may be more to your liking. You
> can read about it at
> http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-devel/2008-March/004782.html
From the linked post:
> Also - right now it checks the hash against the model's attribut
On 10 Apr 2008, at 18:28, Glenn Ford wrote:
> Given database is in this state
> When user does this stuff in browser
> Then database should be in this new state
I like the way you phrased this Glenn. Maybe the distinction is that
Given is everything outside the control of the user, or, if th
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 4:55 PM, Ashley Moran
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David: +1 for stub_model, but could you make it autodetect if the stub
> is for an attribute or a method? It would be nice to do away with
> the :attr and :stub distinction.
Not sure what you mean here - that is handled
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 7:28 PM, Glenn Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 9, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Pat Maddox wrote:
>
> > On 4/9/08, Ashley Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 9 Apr 2008, at 14:14, aslak hellesoy wrote:
> >>
> >>> Just a style comment: I usually strive for a si
On 10 Apr 2008, at 17:59, David Chelimsky wrote:
> I definitely agree with this, however I do see a difference between
> accessing models directly through their API (which I do) and accessing
> the internals of the request cycle (which I don't).
Ok that's what I was doing - not interfering with
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:25 PM, aslak hellesoy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> This is a very "technical" way to express a scenario. It wouldn't make
> much sense to a typical domain expert (unless they know about
> databases).
> I generally try to write scenarios using the domain language,
>
>> This actually sounds more confusing to me when viewed in the context
>> of my own stories, and it seems similar to what's going on here. I
>> write a lot about the user's interaction with the site and what
>> should
>> happen, so I have a lot of stories that look like:
>>
>> Given database is
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Ashley Moran
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry wasn't clear what I meant. I was thinking something like
>Given ...
>When I run User.create!(:foo => "bar")
>Then the Users page should have a row with "bar" in the "foo" column
Gah, that looks hideous.
On 10 Apr 2008, at 22:28, David Chelimsky wrote:
> Not sure what you mean here - that is handled transparently by
> stub_model so you don't have to make any such distinction. Take a look
> at
> http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec-rails/tree/master/lib/spec/rails/example/rails_example_group.rb
> an
On 10 Apr 2008, at 23:06, Pat Maddox wrote:
>> Given ...
>> When I run User.create!(:foo => "bar")
>> Then the Users page should have a row with "bar" in the "foo"
>> column
>
> Gah, that looks hideous.
I think you misunderstood the point - it's supposed to look hideous :)
What I meant
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Ashley Moran
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 10 Apr 2008, at 23:06, Pat Maddox wrote:
>
> >> Given ...
> >> When I run User.create!(:foo => "bar")
> >> Then the Users page should have a row with "bar" in the "foo"
> >> column
> >
> > Gah, that looks h
On 10 Apr 2008, at 23:38, Pat Maddox wrote:
> I don't know what you mean by a special set of stories. In the
> example I gave, the Given steps would most likely be implemented as AR
> calls - not as separate requests. The When and Then would likely be
> implemented as an HTTP request and an ass
Hi y'all
I'm about to start writing up the stories for my second resource. The
second resource is so similar to the first that I feel a good way for me to
start might be to copy and paste the stories and edit from there. This
seems very anti-dry though. Am I missing something obvious, or would
Hi,
I'm a little unhappy with how my stories are organised, and am wondering if
anyone has found any particular method nicest. I'm working within an admin
namespace, and currently have a plain text story file for each controller in
the admin folder. I also have a steps subfolder, with one step f
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 5:46 PM, Tim Haines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm a little unhappy with how my stories are organised, and am wondering if
> anyone has found any particular method nicest. I'm working within an admin
> namespace, and currently have a plain text story file for each
Thanks for the direction. I'm glad to hear that I'm going in the right
direction. I just have a final question and I seem to be hitting a
stub/mocking road block at the moment. In my controller I have this...
def index
@entries = current_user.entries
end
How would I rspec this out correctly? This
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Glenn Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Quoting Aslak
> > Given the customers joe, paul and lisa are registered users
> > When a user signs up as lisa
> > Then the user should be informed that the name is taken
> > And the user lisa should not be able to log in
>
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 6:38 PM, Pat Maddox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 3:30 PM, Ashley Moran
> > But say that actually, "Given a user named Pat" and "Given the user
> > is 22 years old" are implemented as DB API calls - in this case is
> > there merit to having a s
> When I create a user with foo="bar"
>
> is better because it doesn't expose the implementation. Just the
> model concept and any relevant attributes.
I hide model details from Stories by using webrat and form field labels.
When I create a user with Username: kamal, Password: test
And click sub
I read about webrat and stories 30 mins ago -
http://www.benmabey.com/2008/02/04/rspec-plain-text-stories-webrat-chunky-bacon/-
good article.
Tim.
On 11/04/2008, Kamal Fariz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > When I create a user with foo="bar"
> >
> > is better because it doesn't expose the implem
On Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 8:46 PM, Tim Haines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm a little unhappy with how my stories are organised, and am wondering
> if anyone has found any particular method nicest. I'm working within an
> admin namespace, and currently have a plain text story file for eac
29 matches
Mail list logo
