I have a problem understanding where a specific part of code in MHartls tutorial comes from (and because of that I can't seem to change it to better fit my needs...) The part I am talking about is an rspec test:
describe "delete links" do
it { should_not have_link('delete') }
describe "as an admin user" do
let(:admin) { FactoryGirl.create(:admin) }
before do
sign_in admin
visit users_path
end
it { should have_link('delete', href: user_path(User.first)) }
it "should be able to delete another user" do
expect do
click_link('delete', match: :first)
end.to change(User, :count).by(-1)
end
it { should_not have_link('delete', href: user_path(admin)) }
end
Right now the test checks if a an admin attribute of a user is true or false. I am instead trying to check if the role attribute of a user contains the word 'Administrator'. The model is working, the views show everything correctly - but I don't know how to rewrite the test, right now it is failing.
One part that puzzles me specifically is "sign_in admin" and "user_path(admin)" - where does this come from? How does rspec know who the admin is?
And if it's an attribute that is somewhere defined, can I simply change it from admin = true/false to admin is true if role is administrator ?
Many thanks for your help!
Updated:
I do have a file called factories.rb, here is the content according to Mhartls tutorial:
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :user do
sequence(:name) { |n| "Person #{n}" }
sequence(:email) { |n| "person_#{n}#example.com"}
password "foobar"
password_confirmation "foobar"
factory :admin do
admin true
end
end
end
I tried changing it into:
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :user do
sequence(:first_name) { |n| "First #{n}" }
sequence(:last_name) { |n| "Last #{n}" }
sequence(:primary_email) { |n| "person_#{n}#example.com"}
password "foobar"
password_confirmation "foobar"
factory :role do
role "Administrator"
end
end
end
Additional information in response to your comments:
I am not using Devise - the user model is build based on the railstutorial with minor modifications (more form fields plus the admin field is in my case a field "role" with a string)
It is clear what user_path is - but why is there an (admin) behind it?
I am trying to test exactly what is in the test - the problem is that FactoryGirl tests with a user whose admin attribute is set to true.
Just to summarise:
I do not want to change what the test is testing - I only want to change how an administrator gets identified by factorygirl. Right now it tests if the attribute "admin" is set to true or false. I want it to check if the attribute "role" has the content "Administrator"
I think you may be confusing what you need to do with your test and what you need to do in your production code.
If you change the definition of FactoryGirl(:admin) as you have done, then your test is fine as is.
However, you need to change your production code so that "admin-ness" is defined in terms of role as well, and you haven't mentioned that.
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.
I am testing the creation of a product with Capybara, i.e., I am filling a form with automated test. This product belongs to certain models, for example, to a home.
I have two factory files to create this two models, the product and the house. In the form, user should select the home from a select (Drop down). I manage to do it, but the solution feels not clean:
(I am creating the home instance in the feature test, since I need a home to be selected in the form for the product. This house belongs to other models)
require 'rails_helper'
require 'pry'
RSpec.describe 'Add a product features' do
context "Create new product from add a product menu" do
let(:user) { create(:user) }
let!(:home) { create(:home, name: "My Place", user: user) }
before(:each) do
# home.name = "My place"
# home.save
end
before(:each) do
# binding.pry
login_as(user, :scope => :user)
visit menu_add_product_path
click_link("Take a picture")
expect(current_path).to eql('/products/new')
binding.pry
within('form') do
attach_file('product_taken_photos_attributes_0_taken_pic', File.absolute_path('./app/assets/images/macbook1.jpg'))
fill_in 'Brand', with: "Apple"
fill_in 'Product type', with: "Smartphone"
fill_in 'Price of purchase', with: 800.3
fill_in 'Date of purchase', with: "2017-05-03"
select("My place", :from => 'product_home_id')
end
end
it 'should be successful' do
binding.pry
within('form') do
fill_in 'Model', with: "Iphone 6"
end
click_button('Create Product')
binding.pry
expect(current_path).to eql(product_path(Product.last))
expect(page).to have_content 'Iphone 6'
end
# it 'should not be successful' do
# click_button('Create Product')
# expect(current_path).to eql('/products') # the post products actually!
# expect(page).to have_content(/Model can\'t be blank/)
# end
end
end
Factories:
home.rb
FactoryBot.define do
factory :home do
sequence(:name) { |n| "My Home#{n}" }
address 'c/ Viladomat n200 50 1a'
insurer
house_type
user
end
end
product.rb
FactoryBot.define do
factory :product do
model 'macbook pro'
form_brand 'apple'
form_product_type 'laptop'
price_of_purchase 1200
date_of_purchase Date.new(2017,06,06)
end
end
user.rb
FactoryBot.define do
factory :user do
sequence(:email) { |n| "myemail#{n}#mail.com" }
password 123456
end
end
house_type.rb
FactoryBot.define do
factory :house_type do
name 'Flat'
end
end
If I use the let! operator to create a home for all the tests, the test fails:
let!(:home) { create(:home, name: "My Place", user: user) }
Console log:
Capybara::ElementNotFound:
Unable to find visible option "My place" within #<Capybara::Node::Element tag="select" path="/html/body/div[2]/form/div[4]/div/div[2]/select">
But, if I create the home manually, before each test, it works
let(:home) { create(:home, name: "My Place", user: user) }
before(:each) do
home.name = "My place"
home.save
end
Why is the let! not working? If I put a binding.pry in my test, in both cases I have the created home in my database.
You should be configuring your factories to automatically create needed default associations so you can create a needed instance in your tests without having to create all the other non-specialized records. Your home factory should look something like
FactoryBot.define do
factory :home do
sequence(:name) { |n| "Home#{n}" }
address { 'c/ Viladomat n200 50 1a' } # You might want to define this to use a sequence too so it's unique when you create multiples
insurer
house_type
user
end
end
Something like that would then let you create a valid Home instance by just calling create(:home). If you want to customize any of associations/parameters you can pass them to the factory create/build method. So in your example it would just become
let(:home) { create(:home, name: 'My place') }
If you wanted to also manually create the user object, so you can call login(user...) rather than having to access an auto generated user like login(home.user...) then you would do
let(:user) { create(:user) }
let!(:home) { create(:home, name: 'My place', user: user }
Note the use of let! for home rather than let. This is because let is lazily evaluated so the instance won't actually be built until you first call home in your test - Since, when calling login_as(user..., you don't call home in your test you need to use let! instead so the object is created before your test is run. You also probably want to be using FactoryBot sequences in things like the email of your user factory, so that you can create more than one user in tests.
Additionally you're calling expect(current_path).to eql('/new_from_camera'), which will lead to flaky tests since the eql matcher doesn't have waiting behavior built-in. Instead you should always prefer the Capybara provided matchers which would mean calling expect(page).to have_current_path('/new_form_camera') instead.
I think you can add the associations directly in the home factory:
let(:insurer) { create(:insurer) }
let(:house_type) { create(:house_type) }
let(:user) { create(:user) }
let(:home) { create(:home, name: "My place", insurer: insurer, house_type: house_type, user: user) }
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 am going through the rails tutorial and I am up to a point where I have quite a few tests (124).
I am starting to run into an issue in which sometimes a set of tests will randomly fail, but when I try to reproduce them using the same seed, they pass. The fails seem to be mainly related to a FactoryGirl sequence used to generate unique user emails. Most of the time the tests all pass, and if I run with out providing a seed these fails popup maybe 10% of the time.
Here is an example of what I am seeing:
Here is the rspec test code that seems to sometimes fail
describe "pagination" do
before(:all) { 30.times { FactoryGirl.create(:user) } }
after(:all) { User.delete_all }
it { should have_selector('div.pagination') }
it "should list each user" do
User.paginate(page: 1).each do |user|
page.should have_selector('li', text: user.name)
end
end
end
Here is the factory:
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :user do
sequence(:name) { |n| "Person #{n}" }
sequence(:email) { |n| "person_#{n}#example.com"}
password "foobar"
password_confirmation "foobar"
factory :admin do
admin true
end
end
factory :micropost do
content "Lorem ipsum"
user
end
end
Update:
The issue is related to the test database not being cleaned up after some tests. I could (and did) find the tests that were creating the user.
I decided to use the database_cleaner gem and configure it as recommended here:
configuring database_cleaner
Perhaps previous tests are setting these users. Try putting the User.delete_all in the before filter before creating them.
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