How should I spec this nested build:
#projects_controller.rb
def new
#account.projects.build
end
So far I have something like this:
#projects_controller_spec.rb
describe ProectssController do
describe "GET new" do
let(:account) { mock_model(Account) }
let(:project) { mock_model(Project).as_null_object }
before do
Account.stub(:find_by_subdomain!).and_return(account)
#Project.should_receive(:build).with(:account_id => account.id).and_return(project)
end
it "assigns #project" do
get :new
assigns[:project].should eq(project)
end
end
end
Not sure how I should be specing this...
The assignment is missing in ProjectsController#new. Should be:
def new
# ...
#project = #account.projects.build
# ...
end
Then you can stub returning a double as you intended:
it "assigns #project" do
account = mock_model(Account)
Account.stub(:find_by_subdomain!).and_return(account)
project = account.stub_chain(:projects,:build) { mock_model(Project) }
get :new
assigns(:project).should == project
end
In general, I recommend stubbing and mocking as little as possible. I recommend using something like Factory Girl to create real database objects for the tests to interact with. That means that Account and Project would be real ActiveRecord classes, and then #account would be a real AR object with a projects association that works just like it does in production. This is important, since otherwise you're just testing to the implementation you've written, and haven't actually tested that your code functions when it's actually using ActiveRecord.
Once you can do that, I would recommend simply checking things you care about for the Project model, e.g.:
assigns[:project].should be_instance_of(Project)
assigns[:project].should be_new_record
assigns[:project].account.should == logged_in_user
Hope this helps!
Related
I am trying to write two RSpec tests for two different problems that are much more advanced that what I'm used to writing.
What I'm trying to test within my controller:
def index
#buildings ||= building_class.active.where(place: current_place)
end
My attempt at writing the RSpec test:
describe 'GET :index' do
it "assigns #buildings" do
#buildings ||= building_class.active.where(place: current_place)
get :index
expect(assigns(:buildings)).to eq([building])
end
end
This test failed and wouldn't even run so I know I'm missing something.
My second test is needing to test the returned value of a class method. Here is what I am needing to test within the controller:
def class_name
ABC::Accountant::Business
end
Here is my attempt at testing this method:
describe "class name returns ABC::Accountant::Business" do
subject do
expect(subject.class_name).to eq(ABC::Accountant::Business)
end
end
For the first test I would do something like this:
First, I would move that .active.where(place: current_place) to a scope (I'm guessing building_class returns Building or something like that):
class Building << ApplicationRecord
scope :active_in, -> (place) { active.where(place: place)
Then it's easier to stub for the test
describe 'GET :index' do
it "assigns #buildings" do
scoped_buildings = double(:buildings)
expect(Building).to receive(:active_in).and_return(scoped_buildings)
get :index
expect(assigns(:buildings)).to eq(scoped_buildings)
end
end
Then your controller will do
#buildings ||= building_class.active_in(current_place)
This way you are testing two things: that the controller actually calls the scope and that the controller assigns the returned value on the #buildings variable (you don't really need to test the actual buidlings, you can test the scope on the model spec).
Personally, I feel like it would be better to do something like #buildings = current_place.active_buildings using the same idea of the scope to test that you are getting the active buildings of the current place.
EDIT: if you can't modify your controller, then the stubbing is a little different and it implies some chaining of methods that I don't like to explicitly test.
scoped_buildings = double(:buildings)
controller.stub_chain(:building_class, :active, :where).and_return(scoped_building)
get :index
expect(assings(:buildings)).to eq scoped_buildings
Note that now your test depends on a specific implementation and testing implementation is a bad practice, one should test behaviour and not implementation.
For the second, I guess something like this should work:
describe ".class_name" do
it "returns ABC::Accountant::Business" do
expect(controller.class_name).to eq(ABC::Accountant::Business)
end
end
IMHO, that the method's name if confusing, class_name gives the idea that it returns a string, you are not returnin a name, you are returning a class. Maybe you can change that method to resource_class or something less confusing.
I am trying to test the new action in my controller. At the moment it looks like this:
Controller
def new
#business = Business.new
#business.addresses.build
end
Spec
describe 'GET #new' do
it 'assigns a new business to #business' do
get :new
expect(assigns(:business)).to be_a_new(Business)
end
end
I would like to test the line '#business.addresses.build'. How do I do this?
Thanks in advance!
How about
expect(assigns(:business).addresses.first).to be_a_new(Address)
Assuming build is a method, you only need test to ensure that build is called. You could do so by replacing the new Business with a mock that has an addresses attribute that expects to receive :build.
I haven't tested this, but I suspect you could do something like:
business = double('business')
addresses = double('addresses')
business.should_receive(:addresses).and_return(addresses)
addresses.should_receive(:build)
Business.stub(:new).and_return(business)
I'm following a TDD approach to building our app, and creating a whole bunch of service objects, keeping models strictly for data management.
Many of the services I've built interface with models. Take for example MakePrintsForRunner:
class MakePrintsForRunner
def initialize(runner)
#runner = runner
end
def from_run_report(run_report)
run_report.photos.each do |photo|
Print.create(photo: photo, subject: #runner)
end
end
end
I appreciate the create method could arguably be abstracted into the Print model, but let's keep it as is for now.
Now, in the spec for MakePrintsForRunner I'm keen to avoid including spec_helper, since I want my service specs to be super fast.
Instead, I stub out the Print class like this:
describe RunnerPhotos do
let(:runner) { double }
let(:photo_1) { double(id: 1) }
let(:photo_2) { double(id: 2) }
let(:run_report) { double(photos: [photo_1, photo_2]) }
before(:each) do
#service = RunnerPhotos.new(runner)
end
describe "#create_print_from_run_report(run_report)" do
before(:each) do
class Print; end
allow(Print).to receive(:create)
#service.create_print_from_run_report(run_report)
end
it "creates a print for every run report photo associating it with the runners" do
expect(Print).to have_received(:create).with(photo: photo_1, subject: runner)
expect(Print).to have_received(:create).with(photo: photo_2, subject: runner)
end
end
end
And all goes green. Perfect!
... Not so fast. When I run the whole test suite, depending on the seed order, I am now running into problems.
It appears that the class Print; end line can sometimes overwrite print.rb's definition of Print (which obviously inherits from ActiveRecord) and therefore fail a bunch of tests at various points in the suite. One example is:
NoMethodError:
undefined method 'reflect_on_association' for Print:Class
This makes for an unhappy suite.
Any advice on how to tackle this. While this is one example, there are numerous times where a service is directly referencing a model's method, and I've taken the above approach to stubbing them out. Is there a better way?
You don't have to create the Print class, simply use the one that is loaded, and stub it:
describe RunnerPhotos do
let(:runner) { double }
let(:photo_1) { double(id: 1) }
let(:photo_2) { double(id: 2) }
let(:run_report) { double(photos: [photo_1, photo_2]) }
before(:each) do
#service = RunnerPhotos.new(runner)
end
describe "#create_print_from_run_report(run_report)" do
before(:each) do
allow(Print).to receive(:create)
#service.create_print_from_run_report(run_report)
end
it "creates a print for every run report photo associating it with the runners" do
expect(Print).to have_received(:create).with(photo: photo_1, subject: runner)
expect(Print).to have_received(:create).with(photo: photo_2, subject: runner)
end
end
end
Edit
If you really need to create the class in the scope of this test alone, you can undefine it at the end of the test (from How to undefine class in Ruby?):
before(:all) do
unless Object.constants.include?(:Print)
class TempPrint; end
Print = TempPrint
end
end
after(:all) do
if Object.constants.include?(:TempPrint)
Object.send(:remove_const, :Print)
end
end
I appreciate the create method could arguably be abstracted into the Print model, but let's keep it as is for now.
Let's see what happens if we ignore this line.
Your difficulty in stubbing a class is a sign that the design is inflexible. Consider passing an already-instantiated object to either the constructor of MakePrintsForRunner or the method #from_run_report. Which to choose depends on the permanence of the object - will the configuration of printing need to change at run time? If not, pass to the constructor, if so, pass to the method.
So for our step 1:
class MakePrintsForRunner
def initialize(runner, printer)
#runner = runner
#printer = printer
end
def from_run_report(run_report)
run_report.photos.each do |photo|
#printer.print(photo: photo, subject: #runner)
end
end
end
Now it's interesting that we're passing two objects to the constructor, yet #runner is only ever passed to the #print method of #printer. This could be a sign that #runner doesn't belong here at all:
class MakePrints
def initialize(printer)
#printer = printer
end
def from_run_report(run_report)
run_report.photos.each do |photo|
#printer.print(photo)
end
end
end
We've simplified MakePrintsForRunner into MakePrints. This only takes a printer at construction time, and a report at method invocation time. The complexity of which runner to use is now the responsibility of the new 'printer' role.
Note that the printer is a role, not necessarily a single class. You can swap the implementation for different printing strategies.
Testing should now be simpler:
photo1 = double('photo')
photo2 = double('photo')
run_report = double('run report', photos: [photo1, photo2])
printer = double('printer')
action = MakePrints.new(printer)
allow(printer).to receive(:print)
action.from_run_report(run_report)
expect(printer).to have_received(:print).with(photo1)
expect(printer).to have_received(:print).with(photo2)
These changes might not suit your domain. Perhaps a runner shouldn't be attached to a printer for more than one print. In this case, perhaps you should take a different next step.
Another future refactoring might be for #from_run_report to become #from_photos, since the report isn't used for anything but gathering photos. At this point the class looks a bit anaemic, and might disappear altogether (eaching over photos and calling #print isn't too interesting).
Now, how to test a printer? Integrate with ActiveRecord. This is your adapter to the outside world, and as such should be integration tested. If all it really does is create a record, I probably wouldn't even bother testing it - it's just a wrapper around an ActiveRecord call.
Class names are just constants so you could use stub_const to stub an undefined constant and return a double.
So instead of defining a class in your before(:each) block do this:
before(:each) do
stub_const('Print', double(create: nil))
#service.create_print_from_run_report(run_report)
end
When writing tests using RSpec, I regularly have the need to express something like
Klass.any_instance_with_id(id).expects(:method)
Main reason is that in my test, I often have the object that should receive that method call available, but due to the fact that ActiveRecord, when loading the object with that id from the database, will create a different instance, I can't put the "expects" on my own instance
Sometimes I can stub the find method to force ActiveRecord to load my instance, sometimes I can stub other methods, but having that "any_instance_with_id" would make life so much easier...
Can't image I'm the first having this problem... So if any of you found a "workaround", I'd be glad to find out!
Example illustrating the need:
controller spec:
describe 'an authorized email' do
let(:lead) { create(:lead, status: 'approved') }
it "should invoice its organisation in case the organisation exceeds its credit limit" do
lead.organisation.expects :invoice_leads
get :email
end
end
controller:
def email
leads = Lead.approved
leads.each do |lead|
lead.organisation.invoice_leads if lead.organisation.credit_limit_exceeded?
end
redirect_to root_path
end
It seems weird to me you need that for specs.
You should take the problem one level higher: when your app tries to retrieve the record.
Example:
#code
#user = User.find(session[:user_id])
# spec
let(:fake_user) { mock_model 'User', method: false }
it 'description' do
User.should_receive(:find).and_return fake_user
fake_user.expects(:method)
#...
end
Order/invoice example:
let(:order) { mock_model 'order', invoice: invoice }
let(:invoice) { mock_model 'Invoice', 'archive!' => false }
I am finding it very hard to stub certain attributes of a model on a controller test. I want to make sure to stub as little as possible.
EDIT: I have been demoved of using stubs for such integration. I understood that the stubs won't reach the action call. The correct question would now be:
How can one use mocks and stubs to simulate a certain state in a Rails controller test?
So I've reached something like the following:
Spec
require 'spec_helper'
describe TeamsController do
let(:team) { FactoryGirl.create :team }
context "having questions" do
let(:competition) { FactoryGirl.create :competition }
it "allows a team to enter a competition" do
post(:enter_competition, id: team.id, competition_id: competition.id)
assigns(:enroll).team.should == team
assigns(:enroll).competition.should == competition
end
end
# ...
end
Factories
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :team do
name "Ruby team"
end
factory :competition, class: Competition do
name "Competition with questions"
after_create do |competition|
competition.
stub(:questions).
and_return([
"something"
])
end
end
factory :empty_competition, class: Competition do
name "Competition without questions"
questions []
after_create do |competition|
competition.stub(:questions).and_return []
end
end
end
Production code
class TeamsController < ApplicationController
def enter_competition
#team = Team.find params[:id]
#competition = Competition.find params[:competition_id]
#enroll = #team.enter_competition #competition
render :nothing => true
end
end
class Team < ActiveRecord::Base
def enter_competition competition
raise Competition::Closed if competition.questions.empty?
enroll = Enroll.new team: self, competition: competition
enroll.save
enroll
end
end
When I run the test, the questions attribute comes as being nil and so the test fails in the model when checking for nil.empty?.
Why isn't the stub being used so that the state of that message is correctly used? I expected that #competition.questions would be [ "question" ] but instead I get nil.
The problem you're running into is that stub works on an instance of a Ruby object; it doesn't affect all ActiveRecord objects that represent the same row.
The quickest way to fix your test would be to add this to your test, before the post:
Competition.stub(:find).and_return(competition)
The reason that's necessary is that Competition.find will return a fresh Competition object that doesn't have questions stubbed out, even though it represents the same database row. Stubbing find as well means that it will return the same instance of Competition, which means the controller will see the stubbed questions.
I'd advise against having that stub in your factory, though, because it won't be obvious what's stubbed as a developer using the factory, and because it means you'll never be able to test the real questions method, which you'll want to do in the Competition unit test as well as any integration tests.
Long story short: if you stub out a method on an instance of your model, you also need to stub out find for that model (or whatever class method you're using to find it), but it's not a good idea to have such stubs in a factory definition.
When you call create on FactoryGirl, it creates database records which you then retrieve back in your controller code. So the instances you get (#team, #competition) are pure ActiveRecord, without any methods stubbed out.
Personally I would write you test like this (not touching database at all):
let(:team) { mock_model(Team) }
let(:competition) { mock_model(Competition) }
before do
Team.stub(:find) { team }
Competition.stub(:find) { competition }
end
and then in your test something like this:
it "should call enter_competition on #team with #competition" do
team.should_receive(:enter_competition).with(competition)
post :enter_competition, id: 7, competition_id: 10
I don't really understand what your controller is supposed to do or what are you testing for that matter, sorry :(