Unresolved ruby reference in RubyMine - ruby-on-rails

Is there any way to avoid the "unresolved ruby reference" warning in RubyMine IDE?
for example, when some code in my view calls a method of the view helper, I get the "unresolved ruby reference" warning even though the code works.
The case described above is just one of many.
Another example is when using RSpec:
it "should require an email" do
no_email_user = User.new(#attr.merge(:email => ""))
no_email_user.should_not be_valid
end
the parameter "be_valid" is not known to the RubyMine IDE.
My question is - is there any way to solve this? should I require additional files? should I do something differently?
Those false positives regarding unresolved ruby methods/constants are really disturbing, and it also affects the results of the "find usages" action in RubyMine.
I'm using RubyMine 3.1
I would really appreciate any help in resolving this issue.

This issue is already submitted to the RubyMine bug tracker, please watch/vote.

I think in this case this is hard to solve. Ruby allows great magic to happen using method_missing and as far as i know, the be_valid is also implemented in this way. Actually there is no be_valid but it calls the valid? method and expects it to be true.
In rspec, this work for any method ending in a ?. So if you have a method ready?, you can write should be_ready.
I am a fulltime Rubymine user, but i do not know how they could solve that nor do i expect it.

To turn off the warning you are getting in RubyMine 3.1, which I think might be your original question, you need to go to File->Preferences. Then, on the left, go to "Inspections". Open up the "Ruby" section and uncheck "Unresolved Ruby Reference." The Preferences is searchable so, if you get others like that, you might try the search. Good luck!

Related

RSpec 2 'something.should be`

I came across some horrible looking RSpec 2 test:
something.should be
Nope, I didn't accidentally forget to cut+paste the rest of the line,
that's it!
So what's the exact semantic of that? should_not be_nil ?
Please chime in why this is horrible style.
IMHO it's sloppy, not precise, and does not clearly communicate what's required. (it triggers my gag reflex ;)
You're correct - according to the docs object.should.be equals object.should_not be_nil
Documentation, 4th one down in that first list.
From the docs: "We recommend you use the expect syntax unless you have a specific reason you prefer the should syntax. We have no plans to ever completely remove the should syntax but starting
in RSpec 3, a deprecation warning will be issued if you do not explicitly enable it, with the plan to disable it by default in RSpec 4 (and potentially move it into an external gem)."
I believe the equivalent in newer syntax would be:
expect(something).to be
or more commonly:
expect(something).not_to be_false

Rails Rspec warning: "This dynamic method is deprecated."

My Rails 4/Ruby 2 app is throwing the following warning every time my RSpec tests create a FactoryGirl object: "DEPRECATION WARNING: This dynamic method is deprecated. Please use e.g. Post.find_or_create_by(name: 'foo') instead."
This warning is not thrown when I run my app in development. Is FactoryGirl's code throwing this? I tried to find some information but it doesn't look like other people are getting this.
If you tell Rails to give you a full stack trace for the deprecation warning, you should be able to diagnose it pretty easily. The warnings are coming from a library called ActiveSupport::Deprecation - tell it to run in debug mode.
# config/environments/test.rb
ActiveSupport::Deprecation.debug = true
For me, the warnings were caused by an old version of the Stringex library.
FactoryGirl would make a new model, which would trigger a call to one of the Stringex methods, which would raise the warning, although there was no way to see that until I turned on full stack traces. bundle update stringex solved the issue with no problem.
It looks like it's coming from ActiveRecord.
module DeprecationWarning
def body
"#{deprecation_warning}\n#{super}"
end
def deprecation_warning
%{ActiveSupport::Deprecation.warn("This dynamic method is deprecated. Please use e.g. #{deprecation_alternative} instead.")}
end
end
I'm not sure why you're not getting the warnings in development. Is your environment suppressing the warnings?

What does expect() do in rspec/cucumber?

In Michael Hartl's Rails Tutorial, many examples use an expect() method. Here's one such example in a cucumber step definition:
Then /^she should see her profile page$/ do
expect(page).to have_title(#user.name)
end
This same example can be written as such to the same effect:
Then /^she should see her profile page$/ do
page.should have_title(#user.name)
end
Why use expect()? What value does it add?
There's a documentation on the rspec-expectations gem about this.
Why switch over from should to expect Basically:
should and should_not work by being added to every object. However, RSpec does not own every object and cannot ensure they work consistently on every object. In particular, they can lead to surprising failures when used with BasicObject-subclassed proxy objects.
expect avoids these problems altogether by not needing to be available on all objects.
A more detailed reasons for this is placed in: RSpec's New Expectation Syntax
expect is a bit more universal. You're passing an object or a block to rspec's expect method, rather than attempting to call a should method on objects that are outside of your control. As a result, expect is coming more and more into favor among developers.

NoMethodError undefined method '-#' NoMethodError in Controller Ruby on Rails

Context:
I pulled the most recent code from the repository and tried to make sure that the changes I was about to push up were going to work with that version of the code. This is a Ruby on Rails application. Also worth noting is the fact that when running the main application that I pulled from on the web, this error does not show up. But if I run my branch or the main branch cloned onto my environment, the error always shows up for every url I try. So it is on my end.
Problem:
As soon as I go to localhost:3000, I get the following error:
NoMethodError in HomeController#index
undefined method `-#' for #<ActionDispatch::Response:0x64fd460>
What I've Tried:
I have asked my question on the #rubyonrails IRC channel and nobody was able to determine what was going on through the Full Trace (I haven't posted it here because I wasn't sure what was the best way to do that on here; it didn't look very good in the code block or block quote). I have looked at my HomeController's index method, which is defined as such:
def index
#groups = #current_user.groups
#things = Thing.where(:group_id => #groups.map{|e|e.id})
end
I have also Googled around and haven't found what I need to fix the problem.
What I've Learned So Far:
-# is an operator. Some people may receive a similar error in assuming that Ruby has the shortcut to
variable = variable + 1
that a lot of other languages have:
variable++
Here is an example of that case: Undefined method `+#' for false:FalseClass (NoMethodError) ruby
Question:
Does anyone have any further suggestions on how to find the issue here? Also, if I could easily put the Full Trace on here, formatted in an aesthetically pleasing manner, would someone tell me how? I'm at a loss with this one :(
Update (2/8/2013):
It seems that the issue does not necessarily reside in the HomeController nor home/index.html.erb View. I have attempted to access ANY url with a valid action and the same error occurs with "NoMethodError in..." changing to the corresponding [...]Controller#index.
Update (2/9/2013):
Since this error happens no matter what url I try to navigate to, I decided to look in the routes.rb file in the config folder. I ran my server through rubymine instead of the command line this time, which made it a little easier to read for me. I started looking through all the spit out and I noticed an interested line that consisted of:
["private-key looking thing"] [127.0.0.1] Started GET "/" for 127.0.0.1 at 2013-02-09 18:20:52 -0700
It seems like there is a syntactical error in routes.rb (that's my best guess at this point). This does not explain why this only is an issue on my local environment with the same code sets, but what else do I have to go off of?
Does anyone have any suggested things to be on the look out for while I sift through this file? Not really sure what to be looking for as far as errors are concerned. Rubymines inspection stuff converted all my double quotes to single quotes and doesn't really have anything else to complain about.
Thanks in advance,
Jake Smith
I am guessing it might as well be an syntactical error in the corresponding view page Home/index.html.haml .. I am suspecting there is unintended '-' in front of variable call. I tried to simulate a similar scenario in my rails platform and see following page on browser
undefined method `-#' for false:FalseClass
Correct lines of code
%h1 All Movies
= "filtervalue=#{#isFilterOld}"
= "Sortvalue=#{#isSortOld}"
Edited to simulate the error (observe the - in front of isFilterOld variable)
%h1 All Movies
= "filtervalue=#{-#isFilterOld}"
= "Sortvalue=#{#isSortOld}"
I have fixed the issue!
What fixed it:
Go to the directory where your gems are (for me that was C:\RailsInstaller\Ruby1.9.3\lib\ruby\gems\1.9.1)
Delete all gems except for bundler
Make sure you delete the gems from the /cache/, /gems/, and /specifications/ folders (I just deleted them from the /gems/ folder at first and bundle install indicated that it could still find the gems)
Run bundle install
Further Inquiry:
Does anybody have any idea why this worked? I don't know if at this point I can narrow down which gem was causing the issue because the app is working now (I can visit all the urls with corresponding views). If the issue comes up again, I will delete gems one by one to nail down which one was at least causing the issue for me. But if anyone has any insight on this, a more detailed answer would be greatly appreciated by many more people than just me, I think. Thanks to all who helped thus far!

What does "Anonymous modules have no name to be referenced by" really mean?

I'm upgrading my Rails app to work with Ruby 1.9 and I keep encountering errors like this:
Anonymous modules have no name to be referenced by
/home/foo/.gem/ruby/1.9.1/gems/activesupport-2.3.8/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:585:in `to_constant_name'
/home/foo/.gem/ruby/1.9.1/gems/activesupport-2.3.8/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:391:in `qualified_name_for'
/home/foo/.gem/ruby/1.9.1/gems/activesupport-2.3.8/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:104:in `rescue in const_missing'
/home/foo/.gem/ruby/1.9.1/gems/activesupport-2.3.8/lib/active_support/dependencies.rb:94:in `const_missing'
/home/foo/app/config/environment.rb:66:in `block in <top (required)>'
etc.
Google finds all kinds of hits for this, but each of them pertains to a specific fix for one specific gem or app. None of them explain what the message really means.
What is an "anonymous module"?
Where is this error message coming from? (The Ruby interpreter itself?)
What is different about Ruby 1.9 that causes this? (Rails 2.3.8 with Ruby 1.8.7 does not encounter this.)
What is the general/proper way to fix this error?
Line 66 of environment.rb is the configuration for super_exception_notifier (old version, 2.0.8):
ExceptionNotifier.configure_exception_notifier do |config|
config[:sender_address] = %("Foo" <foo#foo.com>)
config[:exception_recipients] = %w(foo#foo.com)
config[:skip_local_notification] = false
end
From what I can tell, ExceptionNotifier is undefined, and ActiveSupport is trying to magically load it, but fails and then fails again trying to print a nice error message.
An anonymous module is a module that is declared like so:
Fred = Module.new do
def meth1
"hello"
end
def meth2
"bye"
end
end
instead of by using the regular Module mod_name <block> syntax. Since they have no module name, you can't retrieve the module name. to_constant_name is attempting to call desc.name.blank? where desc is an anonymous module (with no name).
This error is coming from the ActiveSupport module, which may indicate a bug in the active_support gem or may indicate that some other piece of code is using ActiveSupport incorrectly. The error message alone doesn't give enough information to identify the culprit (to me at least, someone with more rails experience might be able to provide more insight).
Without knowing the offending code it's also hard to say exactly why this error is popping up with 1.9, or what needs to be done to fix it. Considering that there are a lot of un- and under-maintained gems out there that have not been updated for 1.9 yet, I would suspect that ActiveSupport is not the source of the problem. Upgrade all of your gems that have 1.9-compatible versions, and then try disabling your other gems one at a time (if you can) and see if you still get the error.
If you provide a list of the other gems that you are using, someone else who may have encountered the error before may be able to provide some details.
This may happen if you try to exploit ActiveRecord's internal class and module contexts in the wrong way. I had this error yesterday while working on a gem which extends deep inner workings of ActiveRecord. I finally managed to get around this problem by redesigning my code which exploits the inner contexts. It would be interesting to see the surrounding lines of environment.rb:66 for further analysis.
This may happen when the class name doesn't match the filename, in
my case it was a file named application.rb contaning the ApplicationController
class. Renaming the file to application_controller.rb solved the problem.
When I got this error, it was due to a misspelling while defining a class. If you are getting this error, it may be worth examining your module and class definitions for typos.

Resources