When using new_user_path for example, can I infer the rendered template name from this helper alone?
I am using rspec's shared examples, and looking for a way to assert that the rendered template is the correct one (rather than, say, a redirect) by only passing the route helper into the shared example.
i.e. what should ??? be if I only pass the path in?
shared_examples 'my spec' do
it 'will not redirect' do
get path
expect(response).to render_template(???)
end
end
Rspec.describe 'MySpec' do
it_behaves_like 'my spec' do
let(:path) { new_user_path }
end
end
Given that this is a controller shared example, you can use the following:
shared_examples 'my spec' do
it 'will not redirect' do
get path
expect(response).to render_template(request.params['action'])
end
end
Rspec.describe 'MySpec' do
it_behaves_like 'my spec' do
let(:path) { new_user_path }
end
end
In the context of your user controller, the test will be:
it 'will not redirect' do
get new_user_path # => get '/users/new'
expect(response).to render_template('new')
end
RSpec's render_template matcher only needs the action.
Related
I am writing test for controllers in Rails:
require 'rails_helper'
RSpec.describe GoodsController, type: :controller do
DatabaseCleaner.clean
user = User.create(password: "12345678")
user.save!
describe "GET index" do
it "renders the index template" do
sign_in user
get "index"
expect(response).to render_template("index")
end
end
DatabaseCleaner.clean
end
the GoodsController has this index action I want to test:
def index
if params[:category_id] == nil
#goods = Good.all
else
#goods = Good.where(category_id: params[:category_id])
end
end
and when I run the test, I receive this error:
1) GoodsController GET index renders the index template
Failure/Error: expect(response).to render_template("index")
expecting <"index"> but was a redirect to <http://test.host/users/sign_in>
# ./spec/controllers/goods_controller_spec.rb:12:in `block (3 levels) in <top (required)>'
I've added that sign_in user line, according to other answers in SO, but it didn't help. It still redirects to the logging page. How do I resolve this?
The user you create is not used by rspec when running the Examples (aka tests). It's just a variable inside a block that doesn't do anything useful.
When dealing with fixtures/factories you should either create them in before, let or inside the test itself (it block).
describe "GET index" do
let(:user) { User.create(password: "12345678") }
it "renders the index template" do
# OR, create it here before sign_in
sign_in user
get "index"
expect(response).to render_template("index")
end
end
Not sure if you are using factory_bot, but you should look at it. Usually DatabaseCleaner is set up inside rails_helper, check this SO post for more details.
If you are going to have multiple tests that need the user to be signed in you could also wrap the sign_in in a before hook.
describe "GET index" do
let(:user) { User.create(password: "12345678") }
before do
sign_in user
end
it "renders the index template" do
get "index"
expect(response).to render_template("index")
end
end
I'm a Ruby on Rails developer and I was testing a fairly simple Rails application using RSpec. I was writing some Routing specs and then I faced this problem:
My routes are like this:
Rails.application.routes.draw do
root 'trip_plans#index'
resources :trip_plans
end
So I have a route like post /trip_plans for creating new plans and triggering the trip_plans#create action.
My Routing spec file spec/routing/trip_plans_spec.rb looks like this:
require 'rails_helper'
RSpec.describe 'trip_plans routes', type: :routing do
describe 'creating a new plan' do
it 'creates a new plan on post in /trip_plans' do
expect(post: '/trip_plans').to route_to(controller: 'trip_plans', action: 'create', title: 'New Plan', day: '3')
end
end
end
Now I need to somehow pass the params title: 'New Plan', day: '3' to my expect(post: '/trip_plans') so it seems like a real user is filling in the forms and hitting submit.
How do I pass params for POST requests to my RSpec Routing spec?
Thanks in advance!
Routing specs don't often add much value. In a routing spec you simply test that a certain route matches the correct controller. The controller is never actually called.
Instead what you can use are controller specs which are used to test how your application responds to user input:
# spec/controllers/trip_plans_controller_spec.rb
RSpec.describe TripPlansController, type: :controller do
let(:valid_params) do
{
title: 'New Plan',
day: '3'
}
end
let(:invalid_params) do
{
day: 'xxx'
}
end
describe 'POST #create' do
let(:action) { post :create, valid_params }
context 'with valid attributes' do
it 'creates a new post' do
expect { action }.to change(Post, :count).by(+1)
end
it 'has the correct attrributes' do
action
expect(assigns(:trip_plan).title).to eq 'New Plan'
expect(assigns(:trip_plan).day).to eq 3
end
end
context 'with invalid attributes' do
let(:action) { post :create, invalid_params }
it 'does not create a new post' do
expect { action }.to_not change(Post, :count)
end
it 'renders the new template' do
action
expect(response).to render_template :new
end
end
end
end
and feature specs which are end to end specs which test the actual user experience:
RSpec.feature 'Trip Plans' do
context 'as a User' do
scenario 'I should be able to create a trip plan' do
visit root_path
click_link 'Create a new trip plan'
fill_in 'Title', with: 'Go west'
fill_in 'Day', with: 5
click_button 'Create trip plan'
expect(page).to have_content 'Trip plan created.'
expect(page).to have_content 'Go west'
end
end
end
Controller specs are very useful for testing exactly how your controller responds to params and where you write actual expectations on the database state.
Feature specs are nice since they cover your views as well and well written specs also guarantee that your user paths are accessible. However they often do not catch errors which are not readily apparent from the front end and are slower, since you often need to render several pages to get to the actual meat of the test.
The stack trace or error message from feature specs is often less useful than lower level specs.
A good test suite is usually made of a combination of model specs, controller specs and feature specs which cover the most important paths through the application.
I'm trying to add a function to allow for quick testing of redirects for unauthenticated users. Here's what I have so far:
def unauthenticated_redirects_to redirect_path #yeild
context "when not signed in" do
it "redirects to #{redirect_path}" do
yield
expect(response).to redirect_to redirect_path
end
end
end
describe SomeController do
describe 'GET #show' do
unauthenticated_redirects_to('/some_path') { get :show }
context "when signed in" do
# One thing...
# Another thing...
end
end
describe 'GET #whatever' do
unauthenticated_redirects_to('/some_other_path') { get :whatever }
end
end
This doesn't work, however, since the scope and context of the primary describe block is not available to the block passed to unauthenticated_redirects_to. This reasonably leads to the error: undefined method `get' for RSpec::Core::ExampleGroup::Nested_1::Nested_2:Class.
Is there a way around this or is there a cleaner way to accomplish something similar which I should consider?
Here's an approach using shared examples which triggers the example based on shared metadata (:auth => true in this case) and which parses the example group description to pick up some key parameters.
require 'spec_helper'
class SomeController < ApplicationController
end
describe SomeController, type: :controller do
shared_examples_for :auth => true do
it "redirects when not signed in" do
metadata = example.metadata
description = metadata[:example_group][:description_args][0]
redirect_path = metadata[:failure_redirect]
http_verb = description.split[0].downcase.to_s
controller_method = description.match(/#(.*)$/)[1]
send(http_verb, controller_method)
expect(response).to redirect_to redirect_path
end
end
describe 'GET #show', :auth => true, :failure_redirect => '/some_path' do
context "when signed in" do
# One thing...
# Another thing...
end
end
describe 'GET #whatever', :auth => true, :failure_redirect => '/some_other_path' do
end
end
For completeness, here's another shared examples approach, this time using a block parameter with a before call which avoids the original scope problem:
require 'spec_helper'
class SomeController < ApplicationController
end
describe SomeController, type: :controller do
shared_examples_for 'auth ops' do
it "redirects when not signed in" do
expect(response).to redirect_to redirect_path
end
end
describe 'GET #show' do
it_behaves_like 'auth ops' do
let(:redirect_path) {'/some_path'}
before {get :show}
end
context "when signed in" do
# One thing...
# Another thing...
end
end
describe 'GET #new' do
it_behaves_like 'auth ops' do
let(:redirect_path) {'/some_other_path'}
before {get :whatever}
end
end
end
Have a look at rspec shared example.
Using shared_examples_for seemed like overkill given that I was only concerned with a single example. Furthermore, it_behaves_like("unauthenticated redirects to", '/some_other_path', Proc.new{ get :whatever}) seems unnecessarily verbose. The trick is to use #send() to maintain the proper scope.
def unauthenticated_redirects_to path, method_action
context "when not signed in" do
it "redirects to #{path} for #{method_action}" do
send(method_action.first[0], method_action.first[1])
expect(response).to redirect_to path
end
end
end
describe 'GET #new' do
unauthenticated_redirects_to '/path', :get => :new
end
I'm working on a test for my Rails 4 app and I'm pretty new to using RSpec. I have a controller named AppsController which has the standard index, new, show, create... methods and they all work the way Rails suggest Etc. "new" creates a new instance of the object and create actually saves it, show, shows it and index shows all of the object. Here are my current tests can anyone see any potential problems or things that i could improve?
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :developer do
email 'example#me.com'
password 'new_york'
password_confirmation 'new_york'
tos '1'
end
factory :app do
name 'New App'
tos '1'
end
factory :invalid_app, parent: :app do
name 'nil'
tos '0'
end
end
require 'spec_helper'
def create_valid!
post :create, app: app_attributes
end
def create_invalid!
post :create, app: app_invalid_attributes
end
def show!
get :show, id: app
end
def update_valid!
put :update, id: app, app: app_attributes
end
def update_invalid!
put :update, id: app, app: app_invalid_attributes
end
def delete!
delete :destroy, id: app
end
def http_success
expect(response).to be_success
end
def expect_template(view)
expect(response).to render_template(view)
end
describe AppsController do
render_views
before(:each) do
#developer = FactoryGirl.create(:developer)
#developer.confirm!
sign_in #developer
end
let(:app) { FactoryGirl.create(:app, developer: #developer) }
let(:app_attributes) { FactoryGirl.attributes_for(:app) }
let(:app_invalid_attributes) { FactoryGirl.attributes_for(:invalid_app) }
describe 'GET #index' do
it 'responds with an HTTP 200 status' do
get :index
http_success
end
it 'renders the :index view' do
get :index
expect_template(:index)
end
it 'populates #apps with the current_developers apps' do
app = FactoryGirl.create(:app, :developer => #developer)
get :index
expect(assigns(:app)).to eq([app])
end
end
describe 'POST #create' do
context 'with valid parameters' do
it 'creates a new app' do
expect { create_valid!
}.to change(App, :count).by(1)
end
it 'redirects to the new app keys' do
create_valid!
expect(response).to redirect_to keys_app_path(App.last)
end
end
context 'with invalid parameters' do
it 'does not create the new app' do
expect { create_invalid!
}.to_not change(App, :count)
end
it 'renders the :new view' do
create_invalid!
expect_template(:new)
end
end
end
describe 'GET #show' do
it 'responds with an HTTP 200 status' do
show!
http_success
end
it 'renders the :show view' do
show!
expect_template(:show)
end
it 'populates #app with the requested app' do
show!
expect(assigns(:app)).to eq(app)
end
end
describe 'PUT #update' do
context 'with valid parameters' do
it 'locates the requested app' do
update_valid!
expect(assigns(:app)).to eq(app)
end
it 'changes app attributes' do
update_valid!
expect(app.name).to eq('Updated App')
end
it 'redirects to the updated app' do
update_valid!
expect(response).to redirect_to app
end
end
context 'with invalid parameters' do
it 'locates the requested app' do
update_invalid!
expect(assigns(:app)).to eq(app)
end
it 'does not change app attributes' do
update_invalid!
expect(app.name).to_not eq('Updated App')
end
it 'renders the :edit view' do
update_invalid!
expect_template(:edit)
end
end
end
describe 'DELETE #destroy' do
it 'deletes the app' do
expect { delete!
}.to change(App, :count).by(-1)
end
it 'redirects to apps#index' do
delete!
expect(response).to redirect_to apps_url
end
end
end
count should have been changed by -1, but was changed by 0 - on DELETE #destroy
expecting <"new"> but rendering with <[]> - on POST #create
expected: "Updated App"
got: "New App" - on PUT #update
expecting <"edit"> but rendering with <[]> - on PUT #update
expected: [#<App id: nil, unique_id: "rOIc5p", developer_id: 18, name: "New App">]
got: nil - on GET #index
Small thing - your #http_success method is testing the exact same thing twice.
You could also factor out the references to app by putting a #let statement right after your #before block:
let(:app) { FactoryGirl.create(:app, developer: #developer) }
then in your specs, just
it 'renders the :show view' do
get :show, id: app
expect_template(:show)
end
Edit:
Then the order of operations will be 1) the #developer is created in the #before block, 2) the spec is entered, 3) at the first reference to app in the spec, the #let block will create an instance of an app.
That means you can't factor out the app creation in the #index spec, because in that case the spec will call the action before it creates the app.
A few things I thought of, reading your code:
You don't need to include parens on method calls taking no arguments. Just http_success will work.
You should get try to use the modern RSpec expectation syntax consistently. Instead of assigns(:app).should eq(app), use expect(assigns(:app)).to eq(app). (There's one exception to this, which is expectations on mocks (ie. should_receive(:message)), which will only take on the modern expect-to syntax as of RSpec 3.
For controller specs, I like to create little methods for each action that actually invokes the action. You'll notice you call get :show, id: app several times in the GET #show specs. To DRY up your specs a little more, you could instead write the following method within the describe block:
def show!
get :show, id: app
end
Try to use one Hash syntax consistently. What's more, Rails 4 can't be run with Ruby 1.8, so there's (nearly) no reason to use the hash-rocket Hash syntax.
If I'm getting really, really picky, I usually consider instance variables in a spec to be a smell. In almost all cases, instance variables should be refactored to a memoized let/given blocks.
If I'm getting really, really, really picky, I prefer to think of controller specs such as yours as strictly a unit test of the controller, not an integration test (that's what Capybara is for), and as such you shouldn't be exercising your model layer at all. You should only be testing that your controller is sending the right messages to the model layer. In other words, all the model layer stuff should be stubbed out. For example:
describe 'GET #show' do
let(:app) { stub(:app) }
before do
App.stub(:find).and_return(app)
end
it 'populates #app' do
get :show, id: app
assigns(:app).should eq(app)
end
end
I know this last is a personal preference, not a metaphysical truth or even necessarily a wide-spread standard convention, so you may choose to take it or leave it. I prefer it, because it keeps my specs very speedy, and gives me a very clear heuristic for when my controller actions are doing too much, and I might need to consider refactoring. It could be a good habit to get into.
First, I'm not certain but I suspect your invalid app factory may be wrong. Did you mean
factory :invalid_app, parent: :app do
name nil
tos '0'
end
nil as a ruby NilClass not "nil" as a string?
As for other comments about cleanup and stuff, here are a few of my thoughts.
You can avoid the need for some of your helper methods and duplication by using before blocks for each describe. Taking just your index tests you could have something more like
describe 'GET #index' do
before do
get :index
end
it 'responds with an HTTP 200 status' do
http_success
end
it 'renders the :index view' do
expect_template(:index)
end
it 'populates #apps with the current_developers apps' do
expect(assigns(:app)).to eq([app])
end
end
Notice also that you don't need to recreate app because your let is doing it as necessary.
On the failures, I suspect the delete count change could be failing because inside the expectation, the test framework is creating a new app (from the let) and then deleting it leading to a count change of 0. For that test, you need to make sure you're app is created outside of your expectation. Because you are using let, you could do that like this:
describe 'DELETE #destroy' do
it 'deletes the app' do
# ensure that app is already created
app
expect {
delete!
}.to change(App, :count).by(-1)
end
end
alternatively, change the let to a let! which will force the creation before the specs actually run.
As for other failures, thought #DanielWright suggested the helper methods, I find those complicate the debug. I can't see where you set the app name to "Updated App", for example. Perhaps a clearer test (for that particular one) would not use the helper methods but could be more explicit. Something like
describe 'PUT #update' do
let(:app_attributes) { FactoryGirl.attributes_for(:app, name: 'The New App Name') }
before do
put :update, id: app, app: app_attributes
end
context 'with valid parameters' do
it 'locates the requested app' do
expect(assigns(:app)).to eq(app)
end
it 'changes app attributes' do
# notice the reload which will make sure you refetch this from the db
expect(app.reload.name).to eq('The New App Name')
end
it 'redirects to the updated app' do
expect(response).to redirect_to app
end
end
end
For the other errors, you might want to start debugging your code. Are you certain it should work? Have you looked at output logs? Maybe the tests are doing there job and finding errors in your controller code. Have you done any step-through debugging?
I have the following tests that I want tested from various actions in the same controller. How can I DRY this up? In the comments below you'll see that the test should call a different method and action depending on which action I'm testing.
shared_examples_for "preparing for edit partial" do
it "creates a new staff vacation" do
StaffVacation.should_receive(:new)
get :new
end
it "assigns #first_day_of_week" do
get :new
assigns(:first_day_of_week).should == 1
end
end
describe "GET new" do
# i want to use 'it_behaves_like "preparing for edit partial"'
# and it should use 'get :new'
end
describe "GET edit" do
# i want to use 'it_behaves_like "preparing for edit partial"'
# but it should use 'get :edit' instead
end
describe "POST create" do
# on unsuccessful save, i want to use 'it_behaves_like "preparing for edit partial"'
# but it should use 'post :create' instead
end
You could do something like this:
shared_examples_for "preparing for edit partial" do
let(:action){ get :new }
it "creates a new staff vacation" do
StaffVacation.should_receive(:new)
action
end
it "assigns #first_day_of_week" do
action
assigns(:first_day_of_week).should == 1
end
end
context 'GET new' do
it_should_behave_like 'preparing for edit partial' do
let(:action){ get :new }
end
end
context 'GET edit' do
it_should_behave_like 'preparing for edit partial' do
let(:action){ get :edit }
end
end
context 'POST create' do
it_should_behave_like 'preparing for edit partial' do
let(:action){ post :create }
end
end
Or, you could use some kind of loop for the examples:
['get :new', 'get :edit', 'post :create'].each do |action|
context action do
it "creates a new staff vacation" do
StaffVacation.should_receive(:new)
eval(action)
end
it "assigns #first_day_of_week" do
eval(action)
assigns(:first_day_of_week).should == 1
end
end
end
One option might be to provide a module mix-in with a method that has your spec inside it.
include Auth # This is your module with your generalized spec inside a method
it "redirects without authentication" do
unauthorized_redirect("get", "new")
end
Then, in our method, we could do a loop through different types of authorization:
module Auth
def unauthorized_redirect(request, action)
[nil, :viewer, :editor].each do |a|
with_user(a) do
eval "#{request} :#{action}"
response.should redirect_to login_path
# whatever other expectations
end
end
end
end