I have a :fakeUser factory defined in factories/user.rb, which I use in user_spec.rb correctly.
I want to be able to do the same, create(:fakeUser), in another rspec file potato_spec.rb.
How can I do this?
require 'spec_helper'
feature "your potato test" do
let!(:fakeUser ) { FactoryGirl.create(:fakeUser ) }
context "your test context" do
#...the actions you want to test
end
end
Within the context you may have different scenarios, for example "when user is logged in" or "when user is guest".
Provided that you have a factory users.rb like this:
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :fakeUser do
name 'John'
#... other attributes you might have for the user
end
end
Related
I've got a problem with Factory bot and logging in as a designated user. I'm trying to run a simple Edit test in rspec. Here it is:
require "rails_helper"
RSpec.describe "Treat management", :type => :system do
before do
treat = FactoryBot.create(:treat)
user = build(:user, email: 'wojtek#gmail.com', password: 'password')
login_as(user)
driven_by(:selenium_chrome_headless)
end
it "enables me to edit treats" do
visit root_path
click_button 'Edit'
fill_in 'Name', with: 'A new name'
fill_in 'Content', with: 'A new content'
click_button "Update Treat"
expect(page).to have_text("Treat was edited successfully")
end
end
And here is my Treat factory. Treats have a name, content and a giver and a receiver foreign keys
FactoryBot.define do
factory :treat do
name {'my first factory treat'}
content {'this is my first treat created by a factory'}
giver factory: :user
receiver factory: :user
end
end
And of course the user factory. Users are defined by email and password
FactoryBot.define do
factory :user do
email {Faker::Internet.email}
password {'password'}
end
end
And you have to know the edit buttom is only present when the logged user is also the giver. I have asked around and supposedly my Treat factory is is well configured. Please help me solve this. If any other parts of code are required please let me know in comments and I'll update accordingly. And of course I know that there is a simplier way to write this test but the use of the factories is a requirement.
1
I have tried hardcoding the user in the factory (without the Faker gem) but that trigers the validation error - the email has been taken.
Right now FactoryBot.create(:treat) will create a User for giver and User for receiver based on the Factory definition.
FactoryBot.define do
factory :treat do
name {'my first factory treat'}
content {'this is my first treat created by a factory'}
giver factory: :user # tells the factory to create a User from the User Factory
receiver factory: :user # tells the factory to create a User from the User Factory
end
end
You are calling this in your test but then creating a third user to test with
before do
treat = FactoryBot.create(:treat) # 2 users created
# changed to `create` since as #max pointed out `build` does not actually create a `User`
user = create(:user, email: 'wojtek#gmail.com', password: 'password') # third user
end
This third user is neither the giver or receiver of the Treat which is why your test fails.
Instead you can override definitions in the Factory by passing arguments to create. In this case you want the User object under test to be the giver of the Treat so we can achieve this as follows (I used modified version of #max's test scheme as it is the preferred way to set this up)
require "rails_helper"
RSpec.describe "Treat management", type: :system do
let(:user) { create(:user) }
before do
driven_by(:selenium_chrome_headless)
end
context 'A Treat#giver' do
let!(:treat) {create(:treat, giver: user)}
before do
login_as(user)
end
it "can edit Treats they've given" do
visit root_path
click_button 'Edit'
fill_in 'Name', with: 'A new name'
fill_in 'Content', with: 'A new content'
click_button "Update Treat"
expect(page).to have_text("Treat was edited successfully")
end
end
end
Here we replace the default creation of a "giver" user with the specific user returned by user method defined in the let block. This ensures that user == treat.giver so that your test can succeed.
So this is my first time writing unit tests, and Im incorporating Rspec w/FactoryBot.
My Specs were working just fine with using # instance variables, However when I use let! the second model fails because the first model was never created.
Spec:
require "rails_helper"
RSpec.describe Note, :type => :model do
before(:all) do
let!(:event){ FactoryBot.create(:event) }
let!(:note){ FactoryBot.create(:note) }
end
it "is valid with valid attributes" do
expect(note).to be_valid
end
end
Factories:
FactoryBot.define do
factory :note do
event_id Event.first.id
content "This is a sample note"
end
end
FactoryBot.define do
factory :event do
title "Event Factory Test"
event_date Date.today
event_time "1:30 PM"
end
end
As you can see, the note requires a Event id (Which requires the event to be created), but it complains when trying to find Event.first.id which should have been created from the let!).
Any ideas? This "seems" to be similar to how others use let in other rspec tests.
let and let! do not work if you wrap them in a before block.
require "rails_helper"
RSpec.describe Note, :type => :model do
let!(:event){ FactoryBot.create(:event) }
let!(:note){ FactoryBot.create(:note) }
it "is valid with valid attributes" do
expect(note).to be_valid
end
end
Also to setup an association within a factory simply pass the name of the factory:
FactoryBot.define do
factory :note do
event # short for association :event
content "This is a sample note"
end
end
(If the factory name is the same as the association name, the factory name can be left out.).
You're still thinking about factories wrong though. They should be factories that produce unique testable records. Not a set of fixtures. The way you have defined it the factory would only work if a event has been created. Never hardwire factories!
If you want to get the event later just do:
require "rails_helper"
RSpec.describe Note, :type => :model do
let!(:note){ FactoryBot.create(:note) }
it "has an event" do
expect(note.event).to be_a Event
end
end
I'm trying to get in the habit of writing specs, however, this is becoming increasingly frustrating.
Assume I have two simple models: User and Story. Each model uses a belongs_to relation. Each model uses a validates :foo_id, presence: true as well.
However, FactoryGirl is creating multiple records.
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :user do
email "foo#bar.com"
password "foobarfoobar"
end # this creates user_id: 1
factory :story do
title "this is the title"
body "this is the body"
user # this creates user_id: 2
end
end
This simple test fails:
require 'rails_helper'
describe Story do
let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
let(:story) { FactoryGirl.create(:story) }
it 'should belong to User' do
story.user = user
expect(story.user).to eq(user)
end
end
What am I missing here? I cannot build a Story factory without a User, yet I need it to be just one User record.
The values you define for each attribute in a factory are only used if you don't specify a value in your create or build call.
user = FactoryGirl.create(:user)
story = FactoryGirl.create(:story, user: user)
When doing something like this you can do:
let(:story) { FactoryGirl.create(:story, user: user) }
Or maybe you can only let the story variable and do:
let(:story) { FactoryGirl.create(:story, user: user) }
let(:user) { User.last}
Yes, it is a feature of factory girl to create the associated user when you create the story.
You can avoid it like this:
require 'rails_helper'
describe Story do
let(:story) { FactoryGirl.create(:story) }
let(:user) { story.user }
it 'should belong to User' do
story.user.should eq user
end
end
This example is setup to be trivially true, but you get the point.
I guess the problem is that I do not know how to use factory girl with Rspec correctly. Or testing in rails correctly for that matter. Still think it is a bit weird though..
I have a class, User, with the following factory:
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :user do
name "admin"
email "admin#admin.com"
adminstatus "1"
password "foobar"
password_confirmation "foobar"
end
factory :user_no_admin, class: User do
name "user"
email "user#user.com"
adminstatus "2"
password "foobar"
password_confirmation "foobar"
end
...
My test looks like this:
...
describe "signin as admin user" do
before { visit login_path }
describe "with valid information" do
let(:user_no_admin) { FactoryGirl.create(:user_no_admin) }
let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
before do
fill_in "User", with: user.name
fill_in "Password", with: user.password
click_button "Login"
end
it "should list users if user is admin" do
response.should have_selector('th', content: 'Name')
response.should have_selector('td', content: user_no_admin.name)
response.should have_selector('td', content: user.name)
end
end
end#signin as admin user
...
Basically I am trying to test that if you log in as an admin, you should see a list of all the users. I have a test for logging on as a non-admin later on in the file. I have a couple of users in the db already.
In the list of users 'admin' that logged in is displayed along with the users already in the db. 'user' is however not displayed unless I do something like this before:
fill_in "User", with: user_no_admin.name
fill_in "Password", with: user_no_admin.password
It is as if it won't exist unless I use it. However, if I use a puts it does print the information I am putting, even if I do not do the 'fill_in' above.
I have a similar example where a puts helps me.
describe "should have company name" do
let(:company) { FactoryGirl.create(:company) }
let(:category) { FactoryGirl.create(:category) }
let(:company_category) { FactoryGirl.create(:company_category, company_id: company.id, category_id: category.id) }
it "should contain companies name" do
puts company_category.category_id
get 'categories/' + company.categories[0].id.to_s
response.should have_selector('h4', :content => company.name)
end
end
Without the puts above I get a
Called id for nil
Do I have to initiate(?) an object created by Factory girl before I can use it in some way?
Any other code needed?
let(:whatever)
Is not creating the objects until the first time you call them. If you want it to be available before first use, use
let!(:whatever)
instead.
Or use a before block:
before(:each) do
#company = FactoryGirl.create(:company)
....
end
Which will create the objects before you need to use them.
Instead of:
factory :user do
name "admin"
email "admin#admin.com"
...
I will do:
factory :user do |f|
f.name "admin"
f.email "admin#admin.com"
...
Instead of:
let(:user_no_admin) { FactoryGirl.create(:user_no_admin) }
let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
I will do:
#user_no_admin = Factory(:user_no_admin)
#user = Factory(:user)
I had a similar issue with an existing test I broke, with a slightly different cause that was interesting.
In this case, the controller under test was originally calling save, but I changed it to call save!, and updated the test accordingly.
The revised test was:
Declaring the instance a let statement
Setting an expectation on the save! method (e.g. expect_any_instance_of(MyObject).to receive(:save!) )
Using the instance for the first time after the expectation.
Internally, it would appear that FactoryGirl was calling the save! method, and after changing the expectation from save to save!, no work was actually done (and the code under test couldn't find the instance from the DB)
that I needed to update and had a hard time getting to actually pass without a hack)
Try to use trait in the factory girl,there is an example as mentioned in the this link
I have started my journey with TDD in Rails and have run into a small issue regarding tests for model validations that I can't seem to find a solution to. Let's say I have a User model,
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
validates :username, :presence => true
end
and a simple test
it "should require a username" do
User.new(:username => "").should_not be_valid
end
This correctly tests the presence validation, but what if I want to be more specific? For example, testing full_messages on the errors object..
it "should require a username" do
user = User.create(:username => "")
user.errors[:username].should ~= /can't be blank/
end
My concern about the initial attempt (using should_not be_valid) is that RSpec won't produce a descriptive error message. It simply says "expected valid? to return false, got true." However, the second test example has a minor drawback: it uses the create method instead of the new method in order to get at the errors object.
I would like my tests to be more specific about what they're testing, but at the same time not have to touch a database.
Anyone have any input?
CONGRATULATIONS on you endeavor into TDD with ROR I promise once you get going you will not look back.
The simplest quick and dirty solution will be to generate a new valid model before each of your tests like this:
before(:each) do
#user = User.new
#user.username = "a valid username"
end
BUT what I suggest is you set up factories for all your models that will generate a valid model for you automatically and then you can muddle with individual attributes and see if your validation. I like to use FactoryGirl for this:
Basically once you get set up your test would look something like this:
it "should have valid factory" do
FactoryGirl.build(:user).should be_valid
end
it "should require a username" do
FactoryGirl.build(:user, :username => "").should_not be_valid
end
Here is a good railscast that explains it all better than me:
UPDATE: As of version 3.0 the syntax for factory girl has changed. I have amended my sample code to reflect this.
An easier way to test model validations (and a lot more of active-record) is to use a gem like shoulda or remarkable.
They will allow to the test as follows:
describe User
it { should validate_presence_of :name }
end
Try this:
it "should require a username" do
user = User.create(:username => "")
user.valid?
user.errors.should have_key(:username)
end
in new version rspec, you should use expect instead should, otherwise you'll get warning:
it "should have valid factory" do
expect(FactoryGirl.build(:user)).to be_valid
end
it "should require a username" do
expect(FactoryGirl.build(:user, :username => "")).not_to be_valid
end
I have traditionally handled error content specs in feature or request specs. So, for instance, I have a similar spec which I'll condense below:
Feature Spec Example
before(:each) { visit_order_path }
scenario 'with invalid (empty) description' , :js => :true do
add_empty_task #this line is defined in my spec_helper
expect(page).to have_content("can't be blank")
So then, I have my model spec testing whether something is valid, but then my feature spec which tests the exact output of the error message. FYI, these feature specs require Capybara which can be found here.
Like #nathanvda said, I would take advantage of Thoughtbot's Shoulda Matchers gem. With that rocking, you can write your test in the following manner as to test for presence, as well as any custom error message.
RSpec.describe User do
describe 'User validations' do
let(:message) { "I pitty da foo who dont enter a name" }
it 'validates presence and message' do
is_expected.to validate_presence_of(:name).
with_message message
end
# shorthand syntax:
it { is_expected.to validate_presence_of(:name).with_message message }
end
end
A little late to the party here, but if you don't want to add shoulda matchers, this should work with rspec-rails and factorybot:
# ./spec/factories/user.rb
FactoryBot.define do
factory :user do
sequence(:username) { |n| "user_#{n}" }
end
end
# ./spec/models/user_spec.rb
describe User, type: :model do
context 'without a username' do
let(:user) { create :user, username: nil }
it "should NOT be valid with a username error" do
expect(user).not_to be_valid
expect(user.errors).to have_key(:username)
end
end
end