So I don't have a great reason for needing to know this other than curiosity - the BEST reason - but I'm not sure what's going on here.
Background:
I'm working through the RSpec book and updating the examples.
On Chapter 24 - Rails Controllers there's a test for a messages controller.
## spec/controllers/messages_controller_spec.rb ##
require 'spec_helper'
describe MessagesController do
describe "POST create" do
let(:message) { mock_model(Message).as_null_object }
before do
Message.stub(:new).and_return(message)
end
# Then a bunch of Tests...
context "when the message fails to save" do
before do
message.stub(:save).and_return(false)
post :create
end
it "assigns #message" do
assigns[:message].should eq(message)
end
it "renders the new template" do
response.should render_template("new")
end
end
end
end
This goes along with the messages controller:
## app/controllers/messages_controller.rb ##
class MessagesController < ApplicationController
def create
#message = Message.new(params[:message])
if #message.save
flash[:notice] = "The message was saved successfully"
redirect_to action: "index"
else
render "new"
end
end
end
When I run the tests:
The test passes with response.
it "renders the new template" do
response.should render_template("new")
end
The test also passes with subject.
it "renders the new template" do
subject.should render_template("new")
end
The test Also passes with page
it "renders the new template" do
page.should render_template("new")
end
The test ALSO passes with NOTHING
it "renders the new template" do
should render_template("new")
end
In case it helps anyone make heads or tails of this, the config/routes.rb just has resources :messages
Why do all those tests pass? What am I actually testing? Are 'page', 'subject', and ' ' just synonyms for response?
Does it matter as long as my tests pass?
By default, the subject would be referencing the class, which is the MessagesController.
Not defining a subject in the last test example, will implicitly set the subject to be MessagesController.
From a binding.pry, it appears that subject is an instance of the controller class:
[2] pry(#<RSpec::ExampleGroups::MyController::DescribeString::ContextString>)> subject.is_a? Class
=> false
[3] pry(#<RSpec::ExampleGroups::MyController::DescribeString::ContextString>)> subject.is_a? Users::SessionsController
=> true
I'm writing tests with rspec for my application controller in my rails app (written in Rails 4) and I'm running into a problem where it doesn't recognize the route for the HTTP request I'm sending. I know there's a way to do this using MyApp::Application.routes but I'm not able to get it working.
#application_controller_spec.rb
require 'spec_helper'
class TestController < ApplicationController
def index; end
end
describe TestController do
before(:each) do
#first_user = FactoryGirl.create(:user)
# this is to ensure that all before_filters are run
controller.stub(:first_time_user)
controller.stub(:current_user)
end
describe 'first_time_user' do
before(:each) do
controller.unstub(:first_time_user)
end
context 'is in db' do
before(:each) do
#user = FactoryGirl.create(:user)
controller.stub(:current_user).and_return(#user)
end
it 'should not redirect' do
get :index
response.should_not be_redirect
end
end
context 'is not in db' do
context 'session[:cas_user] does not exist' do
it 'should return nil' do
get :index
expect(assigns(:current_user)).to eq(nil)
end
end
it "should redirect_to new_user_path" do
controller.stub(:current_user, redirect: true).and_return(nil)
get :index
response.should be_redirect
end
end
end
The error I'm getting right now is
No route matches {:action=>"index", :controller=>"test"}
I would add the test#index route to config/routes.rb, but it doesn't recognize the Test Controller, so I want to do something like
MyApp::Application.routes.append do
controller :test do
get 'test/index' => :index
end
end
but I'm not sure where to add this or if this even works in rspec. Any help would be great!
If you are trying to test your ApplicationController, see this RSpec documentation about it. You will need to define methods like index inside the test, but it works well.
I have a rails 3.2.13 app running rspec-rails 2.14.0 and am trying to confirm that a view renders a particular partial in my test. It actually does work, but I need to add this test. Here's what I have so far:
require 'spec_helper'
describe 'users/items/index.html.haml' do
let(:current_user) { mock_model(User) }
context 'when there are no items for this user' do
items = nil
it 'should render empty inventory partial' do
response.should render_template(:partial => "_empty_inventory")
end
end
end
This runs without error, but does not pass. The failure is:
Failure/Error: response.should render_template(:partial => "_empty_inventory")
expecting partial <"_empty_inventory"> but action rendered <[]>
Thanks for any ideas.
EDIT
This works for me, but Peter's solution is better...
context 'when there are no items for this user' do
before do
view.stub(current_user: current_user)
items = nil
render
end
it 'should render empty inventory partial' do
view.should render_template(:partial => "_empty_inventory")
end
end
For some reason it was counter-intuitive to me to have to call render on a view, but there you go...
So the way one usually tests whether a particular partial is rendered in a view spec is by testing the actual content of the partial. For example, assume that your _empty_inventory parial has the message 'There is no inventory'. Then you might have a spec like:
it "displays the empty inventory message" do
render
rendered.should_not have_content('There is no inventory')
end
Alternately, you could use a controller spec, in which case you need to call the 'render_views' method when setting up the spec. Then you can do something similar to
it 'should render empty inventory partial' do
get :index, :user_id => user.id
response.should render_template(:partial => "_empty_inventory")
end
Assuming you've set up the state for the contoller spec.
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 am working in Rspec of ROR..
I am trying to test my controllers using RSpec.i am having a Users controller with functions like new , tags, etc..
i created a file under spec/users_controller_spec.rb
and added the test cases as.
require 'spec_helper'
describe UsersController do
integrate_views
it "should use UsersController" do
controller.should be_an_instance_of(UsersController)
end
describe "GET 'new'" do
it "should be successful" do
get 'new'
response.should be_success
end
it "should have the title" do
get 'new'
response.should have_tag("title", "First app" )
end
end
end
which gets pass.
But when i add a test case for tags ..
like
describe "GET 'tags'" do
it "should be successful" do
get 'tags'
response.should be_success
end
end
this results in an error as
F...
1)
'UsersController GET 'tags' should be successful' FAILED
expected success? to return true, got false
why it is coming like this ?? i am very new to ROR and cant find the reason of why i am getting this error..
How to make this pass .
Also i tried the Url
http://localhost:3000/users/tags which is running for me .. But on testing using $spec spec/ i am getting the error ..
Your test may be failing for any number of reasons. Does the route require an ID in the parameter hash? Is the controller action redirecting? Is the controller raising an error?
You'll need to look at the controller code /and/or routes.rb to discover the cause of the failure. Take note of before filters in the controller, which may not allow the action to be reachable at all.
You need to add custom routes that are not within the default 7 routes. Assuming you have resources :users within your routes you will need to modify it. I'm also assuming that your tags route is unique to individual users.
resources :users do
member do
# creates /users/:user_id/tags
get :tags
end
end
And in your RSpec test you would call it like
describe '#tags' do
user = create :user
get :tags, user_id: user.id
end
If the route is not to be unique per user the other option is a collection route, something like:
resources :users do
collection do
# creates /users/tags
get :tags
end
end