I'm using Discord's webhook Ruby library, so my code looks like this:
client = Discordrb::Webhooks::Client.new(url: WEBHOOK_URL)
client.execute do |builder|
builder.content = 'Hello world!'
end
In my test, I've injected an instance_spy as the client and would like to verify that I've passed along the correct value ('Hello world!' in this case) to the builder. I'm familiar with how to use expect(...).to have_received(...).with(...), but in this case, how would I verify it?
Related
I'm updating an application that was working with a very old version of RSpec (2.9.0). It works fine with 3.8, but I get a deprecation error about the following code:
response = Net::HTTPOK.new(1.0, "200", "OK")
response.stub(:content_type => 'text/json', :body => contents_raw)
Now, this code is a mock callout to an external API, and it is deep inside my code's libraries. The application I'm testing is a Sinatra app, so I'm using "get" from Rack::Test::Methods to test my app, but then deep inside the app itself is this response.stub
Apparently I should be using "double()" and "allow(object).to receive(...)", but all the examples I've seen are for using double directly in your test's "it" block, which this code is nowhere near. If I actually try to use double I just get a no method error.
WebMocks seems like a very large hammer to just replace this single call.
Maybe the right thing to do is to make a superclass of Net::HTTPOK and pass the response data in wit that superclass's new?
Huh. OK, so the wrapper class method turned out to be far easier than I expected. In my spec file I added:
class HttpWrapper < Net::HTTPOK
def initialize(data, *args)
#data = data
super(*args)
end
def content_type
'text/json'
end
def body
#data
end
end
(Bizarre detail: if I replace every instance of "data" above with "body", it explodes horribly.)
And at the block of code in question I now have:
response = HttpWrapper.new(contents_raw, 1.0, "200", "OK")
And that seems to have done the trick just fine.
If this is a terrible idea for some reason, hopefully someone will let me know. :)
the best way to mock http, use gem which called iswebmock
I've searched for an answer to this but I just can't seem to figure out what's going wrong. I have an api client test that looks like the following:
module MyTests
describe '#update' do
# using a before(:all) block for setup
before(:all) do
#client1 = Client.new
#initial_payload_state = #client1.update.payload
end
context 'with a known starting payload' do
# The payload is some nasty nested json so I grab an existing one
# and then use a helper method to convert it to a full payload.
# Then I update the client with the new payload. I'm using before(:each)
# so I can get the client into this state for every test.
before(:each) do
#full_payload_state = helper_method(#initial_payload_state)
end
context 'alter_payload_1 works' do
# now that I have the payload in its full state I'd like to alter it to
# produce a certain output
before(:all) do
#new_payload_state = alter_payload_1(#full_payload_state)
end
# I now want to update the client with the altered payload and make sure
# it has the same data. The request and response bodies are formatted slightly
# differently in this case.
it 'works' do
#updated_payload_state = #client1.update(#new_payload_state)
expect(payloads_equal?(#full_payload_state, #new_payload_state).to eq true
end
end
context 'alter_payload_2 works' do
before(:all) do
#new_payload_state = alter_payload_2(#full_payload_state)
end
it 'works' do
#updated_payload_state = #client1.update(#new_payload_state)
expect(payloads_equal?(#full_payload_state, #new_payload_state).to eq true
end
end
In reality, my before block for setup is much longer, so I think it makes sense to keep it that way. I tried to use a before(:each) block so I could have the same known state to start each of the alter_payload contexts. The problem is that with this setup, I get a no method error for this line:
#new_payload_state = alter_payload_1(#full_payload_state)
suggesting that #full_payload_state is nil. I'm certain I've got something wrong with respect to scope, but I'm not sure why or how to fix it. Any help greatly appreciated!
Looks like a scope issue with before(:all).
In general, it's wise to stop using before(:all) because it entangles your tests.
Replace your before(:all) lines with before(:each), and this will make each of your tests independent of the others. This will likely help you find your glitch.
I have a very basic problem for which I am not able to find any solution.
So I am using Watir Webdriver with testunit to test my web application.
I have a test method which I would want to run against multiple set of test-data.
While I can surely use old loop tricks to run it but that would show as only 1 test ran which is not what I want.
I know in testng we have #dataprovider, I am looking for something similar in testunit.
Any help!!
Here is what I have so far:
[1,2].each do |p|
define_method :"test_that_#{p}_is_logged_in" do
# code to log in
end
end
This works fine. But my problem is how and where would I create data against which I can loop in. I am reading my data from excel say I have a list of hash which I get from excel something like
[{:name =>abc,:password => test},{:name =>def,:password => test}]
Current Code status:
class RubyTest < Test::Unit::TestCase
def setup
#excel_array = util.get_excel_map //This gives me an array of hash from excel
end
#excel_array.each do |p|
define_method :"test_that_#{p}_is_logged_in" do
//Code to check login
end
end
I am struggling to run the loop. I get an error saying "undefined method `each' for nil:NilClass (NoMethodError)" on class declaration line
You are wanting to do something like this:
require 'minitest/autorun'
describe 'Login' do
5.times do |number|
it "must allow user#{number} to login" do
assert true # replace this assert with your real code and validation
end
end
end
Of course, I am mixing spec and test/unit assert wording here, but in any case, where the assert is, you would place the assertion/expectation.
As this code stands, it will pass 5 times, and if you were to report in story form, it would be change by the user number for the appropriate test.
Where to get the data from, that is the part of the code that is missing, where you have yet to try and get errors.
I'm writing a Rails app to send text messages using the Twilio API:
http://www.twilio.com/docs/api/rest/sending-sms
and to this end, I do:
client = Twilio::REST::Client.new account_sid, auth_token
client.account.sms.messages.create({
# stuff ...
})
That's all good and nice -- however, I don't want my tests to send a bunch of text messages because that would be stupid. So, I'd like to override Twilio::REST::Client.new to give me an object that'll let me call acccount.sms.messages.create in my tests without undue fuss.
I have a solution that works, but feels ugly:
def mock_twilio_service(stub_client)
Twilio::REST::Client.stub :new, stub_client do
yield
end
end
class Recordy
attr_accessor :calls
def initialize
#calls = []
end
def method_missing(method, *args)
ret = self.class.new
#calls << {
method: method,
args: args,
block_given: block_given?,
ret: ret
}
yield if block_given?
ret
end
end
and then in my test:
test "send a text" do
cli = Recordy.new
mock_twilio_service cli do
# ... stuff
end
end
I feel like I'm missing something Super Obvious, but I'm not sure. Am I? Or am I totally barking up the wrong tree? (Yes, I've looked at How do I mock a Class with Ruby? but I don't think it's quite the same...?)
Another idea would be to use WebMock. As your client is making requests to Twilio. You can just stub out the requests. Within the stub you can also define what is returned from the requests and with which parameters it can be called.
And when you set
WebMock.disable_net_connect!
it is sure that no real requests can be made from the test.
This way you don't change any behavior of your test and will not rely on an external API for your tests to pass.
Twilio evangelist here.
We wrote Test Credentials exactly for this scenario. Test Credentials are a special set of credentials (AccountSid and AuthToken) that you can use when you make requests to the Twilio REST API that tell it to basically just go through the motions of making a phone call or sending a text message, but not actually do it (or charge you for it).
You can also use a special set of phone numbers to get Twilio to return specific success or error conditions.
You can find your test credentials in your Twilio dashboard.
Hope that helps.
I am trying to add/append middleware to the stack (in config.ru) on certain requests (where request.path == "/hi")
I was trying to do that with Rack::Builder
But i seem to fail at it.
Rack::Builder.new do
use added_middleware1
use added_middleware2
end.call(#env) if #request.path == "/something"
I am not sure if that makes my problem clear.
The #request variable should only be available when an actual request is happening, but the code you posted is probably getting run at configuration time when the server starts up. There is example code on the front page of the Rack::Builder documentation showing how to do something like you would want:
app = Rack::Builder.new {
use Rack::CommonLogger
use Rack::ShowExceptions
map "/lobster" do
use Rack::Lint
run Rack::Lobster.new
end
}
The stack should look more like this:
use CommonMiddleware
map '/something' do
use SpecialMiddleware
run TheApp.new
end
map '/' do
run TheApp.new
end
Alternatively, you could write a middleware that looks at the request path and runs the other special middleware as needed - sort of like a wrapper for it. The machinery would look something like this:
def initialize app, special_middleware
#app, #special_middleware = app, special_middleware
end
def call env
if route_matches?(env)
#special_middleware.new(#app).call(env) # assumes special_middleware initializer takes no extra parameters
else
#app.call(env)
end
end
def route_matches? env
# examine the rack environment hash, return true or false
end
And the config for using it would look like this:
use RouteMatchingMiddleware, SpecialMiddleware
run TheApp.new