everydayrails / rails-4-1-rspec-3-0 Goto Github PK

You're saying “We’re testing not just for ideal results–the user selects a letter with results–but also for letters with no results.”, but this test is the really the same as the first test. There are results if you pass in 'J'.

I think you should change the letter being passed in to something like 'M' so there are no matching results. Maybe even change the expectation to something like:

expect(Contact.by_letter('K')).to be_empty

Naked command might execute unexpected version, so I think you should specify bin/xxx or bundle exec xxx .

For example:

• guard init rspec => bundle exec guard init rspec
• Run guard => Run bundle exec guard
• spring binstub rspec = > bundle exec spring binstub rspec
• spring stop => bin/spring stop
• rspec --tag focus => bin/rspec --tag focus

But I am not fully confident about which to use. Probably I am misunderstaindig. Please review and investigate by yourself.

In chapter 3, you wrote "We'll fill in the details in a moment, but if we ran the specs right now from the command line (by typing bin/rspec or just rspec on the command line) the output would be similar to the following:" However bin/rspec and rspec are not always interchangeable. (bin/rspec and bundle exec rspec are usually interchangeable, I think.)

rbenv executes the latest version of RSpec in specific Ruby version. If it differs the one in Gemfile.lock, you may not be able to run tests.

The following scenario shows such case (3.1.7 vs 3.0.0):

➜  cb git:(master) rspec -v
3.0.0
➜  cb git:(master) gem update rspec
Updating installed gems
Updating rspec-core
Fetching: rspec-support-3.1.2.gem (100%)
Successfully installed rspec-support-3.1.2
Fetching: rspec-core-3.1.7.gem (100%)
Successfully installed rspec-core-3.1.7
Updating rspec-expectations
Fetching: rspec-expectations-3.1.2.gem (100%)
Successfully installed rspec-expectations-3.1.2
Updating rspec-mocks
Fetching: rspec-mocks-3.1.3.gem (100%)
Successfully installed rspec-mocks-3.1.3
Updating rspec-rails
Fetching: rspec-rails-3.1.0.gem (100%)
Successfully installed rspec-rails-3.1.0
Updating spring-commands-rspec
Fetching: spring-commands-rspec-1.0.4.gem (100%)
Successfully installed spring-commands-rspec-1.0.4
Gems updated: rspec-core rspec-support rspec-expectations rspec-mocks rspec-rails spring-commands-rspec
➜  cb git:(master) rspec -v
3.1.7
➜  cb git:(master) bin/rspec -v
3.0.0
➜  cb git:(master) bundle exec rspec -v
3.0.0
➜  cb git:(master) rspec
/Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/bundler-1.7.6/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:34:in `block in setup': You have already activated rspec-support 3.1.2, but your Gemfile requires rspec-support 3.0.0. Prepending `bundle exec` to your command may solve this. (Gem::LoadError)
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/bundler-1.7.6/lib/bundler/runtime.rb:19:in `setup'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/bundler-1.7.6/lib/bundler.rb:121:in `setup'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/bundler-1.7.6/lib/bundler/setup.rb:7:in `<top (required)>'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:135:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:135:in `rescue in require'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:144:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/dev/private/cb/config/boot.rb:4:in `<top (required)>'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/dev/private/cb/config/application.rb:1:in `<top (required)>'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/dev/private/cb/config/environment.rb:2:in `<top (required)>'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/dev/private/cb/spec/spec_helper.rb:3:in `<top (required)>'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/2.1.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:55:in `require'
    from /Users/jit/dev/private/cb/spec/features/admin_spec.rb:2:in `<top (required)>'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1105:in `load'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1105:in `block in load_spec_files'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1105:in `each'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/lib/rspec/core/configuration.rb:1105:in `load_spec_files'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:96:in `setup'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:84:in `run'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:69:in `run'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/lib/rspec/core/runner.rb:37:in `invoke'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/lib/ruby/gems/2.1.0/gems/rspec-core-3.1.7/exe/rspec:4:in `<top (required)>'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/bin/rspec:23:in `load'
    from /Users/jit/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/bin/rspec:23:in `<main>'
➜  cb git:(master) bin/rspec
......

Finished in 0.62278 seconds (files took 0.39209 seconds to load)
6 examples, 0 failures

Randomized with seed 63723

➜  cb git:(master) bin/rspec -v
3.0.0
➜  cb git:(master) be rspec
......

Finished in 0.62967 seconds (files took 2.6 seconds to load)
6 examples, 0 failures

Randomized with seed 49959

Hello.

First I want to say "Thank you!!!" for creating this book!!! I will recommend this book for the Thinkful.com training site. I'm having problems with the Capybara testing. Rspec doesn't like when I type 'visit root_path'. When I create the Module, it still doesn't like the login aspect.

my github is https://github.com/vdogamer/rpsec1
(forgive my misspelling)

In Simplifying our syntax section in chapter 4, the sample code is described as "is has a valid factory". It should be "has a valid factory".

A reader reported bin/rspec cannot run in "Applying your database schema to test". He or she checked out 01_untested branch and found rspec binstub did not exist in bin directory:
https://github.com/everydayrails/rails-4-1-rspec-3-0/tree/01_untested/bin

Could you check it?

You wrote "RSpec requires eq or eql, not ==, to indicate an expectation of equality.". However, eq and eql are not interchangeable. This expression might lead misunderstanding. I think you don't have to mention eql here.

https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/docs/built-in-matchers

  it "is equal to a float of the same value" do
    expect(5).to eq(5.0)
  end

  it "is not equal to a float of the same value" do
    expect(5).not_to eql(5.0)
  end

As you might know, Rails Tutorial 3rd edition is out now.

The news release says, it is using MiniTest and Lighter-weight testing approach:

http://news.railstutorial.org/rails_tutorial_3rd_ed_screencast_access

I have not read it yet, but the description in "More testing resources for Rails" might need to be changed.

サポートしないという話も。

https://relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/v/3-1/docs/built-in-matchers

    $ rails g scaffold news_release title released_on:date body:text

    $ rake db:migrate

In chapter 11, the commands above could use binstub, like bin/rails or bin/rake. Don't you replace with them?

In chapter 8, you write "We also need to configure Database Cleaner", but it should be "DatabaseCleaner" for consistency. (Very trivial point, I admit.)

In chapter 10, sample code format is broken. Here is my iBooks screen:

I found an example spec which is written in normal text, the code doesn't even contain line breaks so it's very hard to read
I found the issue existing in the PDF and mobi versions, so I assume it also exists in the epub version.
It's under the Testing Validations in chapter 3, highlighted in gray in the screenshot

As for chapter 9 - Tags, a reader commented it might be worth mentioning about run_all_when_everything_filtered option:

https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/v/3-1/docs/configuration/run-all-when-everything-filtered

With this option, you don't have to remove config.filter_run focus: true.

You wrote "RSpec prefers eq over == to indicate an expectation of equality". I feel it is allowed to write as expect(x).to == y, but it isn't. I think you should explicitly explain "==" is not allowed.

In chapter 2, you wrote "That said, there are times when it makes sense to test a specific view. See chapter 12 for more details.", but I could not understand what you mean. In chapter 12, I am not sure which one is written about view test.

In the code below, user: create(:user_with_avatar) should be user: attributes_for(:user_with_avatar), correct?

    it "uploads an avatar" do
      post :create, user: create(:user_with_avatar)
      expect(assigns(:user).avatar_file_name).to eq 'avatar.png'
    end

In the section titled "it{} and specify{}", there is no sample code using specify. (I requested to do so, though...)

It may be hard to understand "Read your specs aloud as you write them, and use the term that makes the most sense--there are not hard rules about when to use one or the other." too.

In exercises in chapter 2, you wrote "if you haven’t already, with bundle exec rake db:create:all.", but it bin/rake would be better for this use case.

In the API test, you use PUT method to update a contact. But isn't it PATCH? As for API design, I am not sure about that, though.

In chapter 9, you wrote specify { should be_named 'John Doe' } but it is not readable. It would be better to write as it { is_expected.to be_named 'John Doe' }. Other sample codes like it { should ... } should be changed to it { is_expected.to ...} too, because you can write without "should" with RSpec 3.

As you may be able to spot, we’re creating an outline of examples here to help us sort similar examples together. This makes for a more readable spec. Now let’s finish cleaning up our reorganized spec with the help of a before hook:

Sample code after the sentence above still require spec_helper. And I found some 'spec_helper's in other chapters. Please grep and fix them.

page 34, line 23 should say in my view:
expect(Contact.by_letter("J")).not_to include @smith

instead of:
expect(Contact.by_letter("J")).not_to include smith

In chapter 7, "PUT" still exists:

        describe 'PUT #update' do
          it "requires login"
        end

        PUT #update
          requires login

As you mentioned in chapter 8, Launchy is installed with Capybara. So you can remove it from Gemfile. Actually I have never added Launchy to Gemfile explicitly.

I found http://ruby.railstutorial.org is now redirected to https://www.railstutorial.org/ . You may want to update the link URL.

When you introduce Faker on page 54 there is this code example:

FactoryGirl.define do 
  factory :contact do
    firstname { Faker::Name.first_name }
    lastname { Faker::Name.last_name }
    email { Faker::Internet.email }
  end 
end

but I think the curly brackets aren't needed.

Hi Aaron, I've just finished to read your book and it was very useful to clarify some doubts I had on rails testing.

I have few remaining questions for you:

• I see in the controller specs that you test that the values in the assigned variable are the correct ones. How do you proceed when the find method is more complex? For example User.search(various_params), you surely have it well tested in the model specs, so what do you check in the controller? That the search method is called and is passed the params? This in my opinion breaks the behaviour testing as it checks that a specific method is called with that exact params (-> fragile tests). But if you call the method and check the results you actually test it 2 times (in the controller and in the model)
• You duplicated (using shared specs) the same specs for different roles (guest, user, admin), in theory it is a good thing to do (because you want to make sure that it works as expected for everyone), in your experience how much does it affect the time to run all specs? If many actions are shared I guess the times is 2 or 3 times what it'd have been without them
• How much time do your tests take to run all specs (models, controllers, features)? And what do you consider "acceptable" and what too much?
• I see you suggest shoulda, isn't a big duplication mirroring the real code? I mean, you have a spec that says that it { should validate_presence_of(:arms) }, and then in the model you have validates :arms, presence: true... I'm not 100% convinced about that test
• I see below that Eric asked about background jobs, and you suggested to test them like you suggest testing rake tasks. What about testing that a job is actually scheduled during another action (in a model or controller)? Would you do something like expect(SomeJob).to receive(:perform_later) or is there a better approach?

Thank you!

In this repository .rspec file has --warnings option, but this is very noisy. When I git-cloned and ran RSpec, I was surprised at too many warnings. I guess beginners would be surprised too.

In chapter 10, you suggest creating custom matcher called have_status_code, but I found the same matcher called have_http_status in rspec-rails.

https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-rails/v/3-1/docs/matchers/have-http-status-matcher#using-in-a-request-spec

In the third chapter Model specs of kindle edition in the testing validations section inthe secon paragraph code snippet is written as plain text

In chapater 9, you introduced Guard + Spring, but in branches for chapter 9, 11 and master, bin/rspec does not use Spring. It is very confusing.

In addition, I think bin/rails and bin/rake should use Spring from the start, because this is Rails 4.1 application.

Phone class has phone attribute. I think it could lead confusing.

E.g.

contact = Contact.find params[:id]
phones = contact.phones # Phone instances
phones = phones.map{|phone| phone.phone } # Phone attributes

It would be better if it has different attribute name. For example:

contact = Contact.find params[:id]
phones = contact.phones
phone_numbers = phones.map{|phone| phone.phone_number }

You might know, but generator config can be used to skip creating JS, SCSS and helper:

    config.generators do |g|
      # ...     
      g.assets false
      g.helper false
      g.javascripts false
      g.stylesheets false
    end

However, this is technique about Rails, not RSpec, so I am not sure if it is worth mentioning.

As you know, pending behavior has been changed since RSpec 3. So the code below should use skip rather than pending in this context:

    it "loads a lot of data" do
      pending "no longer necessary"
      # your spec's code; it will not be run
    end

And I think it is worth mentioning about the difference between skip and pending.

In chapter 10, you wrote attach_file 'Avatar', File.new(...) but that did not work for me. I used string file path instead of File object, like this:

https://github.com/JunichiIto/instance-variable-sandbox/blob/master/spec/features/csv_uploads_spec.rb#L18

Could you check it please?

Now, if we run RSpec from the command line again (via rspec or bundle exec rspec, depending on whether you installed the rspec binstub in the previous chapter) we see one passing example!

In the sentence above, you wrote "via rspec or bundle exec rspec" but I think "via bin/rspec or bundle exec rspec" would be better because readers can easily understand they are using the installed binstub.

In sample code, you wrote "describe "admin access to contacts" do", but document output is "administrator access". Same as user access.

I was getting the following error after adding js: true to features/user_spec.rb

Selenium::WebDriver::Error::JavascriptError: arguments[0] is undefined

I was running Firefox 35. The solution was to uninstall Firefox 35 and install Firefox 34 instead.
After that the specs were passing again. I'm not sure why it doesn't work with 35.

I found the solution on StackOverflow, which also suggests disabling automatic updates of Firefox, otherwise it will update to 35 and the spec may fail again.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/28159499/seleniumwebdrivererrorjavascripterror-arguments0-is-undefined

I found bundle exec rake db:create:all command in exercises in chapter 2. Other chapters seem to have bundle exec too. Please grep and fix them.

Unnecessary block is used in phone attribute:

    FactoryGirl.define do
      factory :phone do
        association :contact
        phone { '123-555-1234' }

        factory :home_phone do
          phone_type 'home'
        end

        factory :work_phone do
          phone_type 'work'
        end

        factory :mobile_phone do
          phone_type 'mobile'
        end
      end
    end

You are using selenium-webdriver, but I don't use Selenium-webdriver day-to-day development. Recently I use Poltergeist.

Selenium-webdriver takes active window, so I don't like it so much. I think using headless browsers like Poltergeist is more practical approach. Do you have any plans to switch JS driver?

I found you use not_to instead of to_not from RSpec 3 edition and I am wondering why.

But anyway I think it is worth mentioning about not_to and to_not. Readers should know they can use both. If there is any rule to determine which to use, I would like to know it.

spec/controllers/contacts_controller_spec.rb:199 fails with

Failures:

  1) ContactsController administrator access behaves like full access to contacts PATCH #update invalid attributes does not change the contact's attributes
     Failure/Error: expect(assigns(:contact).reload.attributes).to eq contact.attributes

       expected: {"id"=>2, "firstname"=>"Lawrence", "lastname"=>"Smith", "email"=>"[email protected]", "created_at"=>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:18:40 UTC +00:00, "updated_at"=>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:18:40 UTC +00:00, "hidden"=>false}
            got: {"id"=>2, "firstname"=>"Lawrence", "lastname"=>"Smith", "email"=>"[email protected]", "created_at"=>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:18:40 UTC +00:00, "updated_at"=>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:18:40 UTC +00:00, "hidden"=>false}

       (compared using ==)

       Diff:

     Shared Example Group: "full access to contacts" called from ./spec/controllers/contacts_controller_spec.rb:233
     # ./spec/controllers/contacts_controller_spec.rb:199:in `block (5 levels) in <top (required)>'
     # ./spec/rails_helper.rb:38:in `block (3 levels) in <top (required)>'
     # ./spec/rails_helper.rb:37:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>'

  2) ContactsController user access behaves like full access to contacts PATCH #update invalid attributes does not change the contact's attributes
     Failure/Error: expect(assigns(:contact).reload.attributes).to eq contact.attributes

       expected: {"id"=>2, "firstname"=>"Lawrence", "lastname"=>"Smith", "email"=>"[email protected]", "created_at"=>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:18:41 UTC +00:00, "updated_at"=>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:18:41 UTC +00:00, "hidden"=>false}
            got: {"id"=>2, "firstname"=>"Lawrence", "lastname"=>"Smith", "email"=>"[email protected]", "created_at"=>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:18:41 UTC +00:00, "updated_at"=>Thu, 08 Jan 2015 06:18:41 UTC +00:00, "hidden"=>false}

       (compared using ==)

       Diff:

     Shared Example Group: "full access to contacts" called from ./spec/controllers/contacts_controller_spec.rb:242
     # ./spec/controllers/contacts_controller_spec.rb:199:in `block (5 levels) in <top (required)>'
     # ./spec/rails_helper.rb:38:in `block (3 levels) in <top (required)>'
     # ./spec/rails_helper.rb:37:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>'

in branch https://github.com/everydayrails/rails-4-1-rspec-3-0/tree/09_speedup

One of code in API testing has wrong syntax highlight:

The implementation of title_with_date is view-specific, so it should be implemented as helper method rather than model instance method. And I18n.l is preferable to strftime for internationalization purpose. For example:

    module NewsReleasesHelper
      def title_with_date(news_release)
        "#{l news_release.released_on}: #{news_release.title}"
      end
    end

Other solution is using decorator gem like Draper. (It would be overkill here, though.)

page 33, line 23 should say in my view:
expect(Contact.by_letter("J")).to eq [@johnson, @jones]

instead of
expect(Contact.by_letter("J")).to eq [johnson, jones]

In chapter 7, you write shared_examples_for 'public access to contacts' do. I wonder why you use shared_examples_for instead of shared_examples. I think it should be shared_examples for consistency.

Your mailer spec has expect(mail.body.encoded).to match edit_friendship_path(user, friend) but mail message usually has url rather than path. So I feel expect(mail.body.encoded).to match edit_friendship_url(user, friend) is better. (edit_friendship_url includes edit_friendship_path, though.)

In addition, such a test case usually requires default_url_options in test.rb. Beginners might get in trouble (like I used to).

Notice the require 'rails_helper' at the top, and get used to typing it–all of your specs will include this line moving forward.

I actually like to add --require rails_helper to a .rspec file in my project root. This has the effect that all my specs are automatically run with rails_helper pre-required. You can do this with other parameters you'd like to use when running rspec as well. My full .rspec file reads:

--color
--format documentation
--require rails_helper