Building proper class and passing a class method - ruby

class Health
def initialize()
#hydration=hydration
end
def hydration
puts"Amount of Water drunk(in oz):"
x=gets.chomp
if #{x}>=20
puts"Good job! keep on it"
elsif #{x} >=(10...20)
puts"Could do better"
else
puts"Not healthy. Go get hydration"
end
end
drinks=Health.new()
puts drinks.hydration
end
I am new to ruby and what i'm trying to achieve is to be prompted. i'm getting the "syntax error, unexpected end-of-input, expecting keyword_end" on the puts drinks.hydration

I dont think you should get any syntax error with your current code. In order to make it working you need to remove the comments in if statements. Also the initialize statement is redundant as you are making explicit call to the method hydration in puts drinks.hydration.
class Health
def hydration
puts "Amount of Water drunk(in oz):"
x=gets.chomp.to_i
if x>=20
puts "Good job! keep on it"
elsif (10...20).include? x
puts "Could do better"
else
puts "Not healthy. Go get hydration"
end
end
end
drinks=Health.new()
puts drinks.hydration

Related

rspec fails even when variables should match

Methods in my class:
def get_class_info
#class_name = get_class_name
end
def get_class_name
puts "Enter the name for your class. Enter 'done' to return to the main prompt."
input = gets.chomp
if input.valid_class_name?
class_name = input.titleize
elsif input.downcase == "done"
run
else
puts "Invalid class name."
get_class_name
end
class_name
end
My test:
it "stores the name in the #class_name property" do
expect(cli.class_name).to eq('Song')
allow(cli).to receive(:gets) {'song'}
cli.get_class_info
end
It fails, saying it expected "Song" but got nil.
If I comment out the expect line and add a pry to the end of the test, querying cli.class_name returns "Song"!!!
Why is this test failing??
Update: Okay, moving the expect line to the bottom of the test apparently solved it. But I'm confused because usually the expectation goes before the actual method call. Am I wrong? What am I missing here?

NilCheck fix on safe navigation operator (&.)

This simple method on a class just run the status method using the safe navigation operator.
def current_status
account&.status
end
But reek report this warning:
MyClass#current_status performs a nil-check [https://github.com/troessner/reek/blob/master/docs/Nil-Check.md]
How can I properly write methods like this to avoid Nil Check?
I've also verified this post from thoughtbot but it seem like "too much" for just a safe navigation operator.
Ruby 2.3.1
The advice from "Example 4" in the linked post is verbose but pretty good :
class MyClass
def initialize(with_account = nil)
#account = Account.new if with_account
end
def current_status
account.status
end
def account
#account || NilAccount.new
end
end
class Account
def status
"Up!"
end
end
class NilAccount
def status
"Down!"
end
end
puts MyClass.new(:with_account).current_status
#=> "Up!"
puts MyClass.new.current_status
#=> "Down!"
If it's "too much" for you, account&.status might be just fine.
Whatever you do : you'll need to test your code as much as possible!
well, tell-dont-ask looks pretty good, but Example 4 looks like an overkill to resolve this specific case.
#andredurao I think, we can use this workaround to pass checks, for some reason reek is fine with it:
def current_status
return unless account
account.status
end

I am unable to execute this program

error:C:\Users\RR\Desktop\ruby_sandbox>ruby classes.rb classes.rb:44:
syntax error, unexpected end-of-input, expecting keyword_end
my code is:
class Animal
attr_accessor :name,:age,:sex,:location
def initialize(age=18,sex="not available",location="not specified")
puts "details of animal"
#age=age
#sex=sex
#location=location
end
def condition(age,name)
if animal.age>animal1.age
puts "#{animal.name } is older than #{animal1.name}"
else
puts "animals age are in increasing order"
end
end
Please take care about your indentation while writing ruby you will see where you missed the end keyword.
But in your case the problem is not only about the indentation before start to fix it. You can check some documentation about Class and Instance Methods in Ruby or this tutorial can help you in your case.
Good luck.

Testing with Rspec - The correct way

My weakest point when it comes to coding, is using TDD & BDD methods - I tend to just write code.. but it is something that I am trying to work on.
Could anyone point out the best way to go about the following problem:
Class1:
module TempMod
class MyClass
def initalize(config)
#config = config
end
def process(xml)
if react_upon? xml.something
puts 'yeah'
else
puts 'nah'
end
end
def react_upon?(xml_code)
#code here
end
end
end
So lets say I wanted to test this class, or build it from a TDD point of view so I write my tests:
describe TempMod::MyClass do
let(:config) {double}
let(:myclass) {TempMod::MyClass.new config}
context 'Given that the xml is something we react upon' do
it 'should check that it is valid' do
myclass.process '<some><xml>here</xml></some>'
end
it 'should output yea'
end
end
How do I test that it is calling the react_upon? method. Do I even want to see it is calling it?
Is the proper way to test it, to test all the functions like the react_upon? itself independently of the other functions?
This is properly the main thing that is most confusing me with this sort of testing. Am I testing the whole class, or just individually testing the functions, and not their interactions with the other functions in that class?
Also I realize the the react_upon? might not adhere to the Single responsibility principle and I would probably move that out to its own module/class which I could test using a stub.
If anyone can shed some light on this for me that would be awesome.
edit:
describe TempMod::MyClass do
let (:valid_planning_status_xml) {
'<StatusUpdate> <TitleId>2329</TitleId> <FromStatus>Proposed</FromStatus> <ToStatus>Confirmed</ToStatus> </StatusUpdate>'
}
let(:config) { double }
let(:status_resolver) { double }
subject(:message_processor) { TempMod::MyClass.new config, status_resolver }
context 'Given that the message XML is valid' do
it 'should check the context of the message' do
expect(message_processor.process valid_planning_status_xml).to call :check_me
end
context 'Given that the message is for a planning event update' do
it 'should call something' do
pending
end
end
context 'Given that the message is for a recording job update' do
end
context 'Given that the message is for a video title update' do
end
end
end
Your question confused me a bit is this what you are asking
module TempMod
class MyClass
def initalize(config)
#config = config
end
def process(xml)
react_upon?(xml.something) ? 'yeah' : 'nah'
end
def react_upon?(xml_code)
#code here
end
end
end
Then test like
describe TempMod::MyClass do
let(:config) {double}
let(:myclass) {TempMod::MyClass.new config}
context 'Given that the xml is something we react upon' do
it "should respond to react_upon?" do
expect(myclass).to respond_to(:react_upon?)
end
it "should react_upon? valid xml" do
expect(myclass.react_upon?(YOUR VALID REACTION GOES HERE)).to be_true
end
it "should not react_upon? invalid xml" do
expect(myclass.react_upon?(YOUR INVALID REACTION GOES HERE)).to be_false
end
it "should say 'yeah' if it is valid" do
expect(myclass.process('<some><xml>here</xml></some>')).to eq('yeah')
end
it "should say 'nah' if it is invalid" do
expect(myclass.process('<some><xml>here</some>')).to eq('nah')
end
it 'should check the context of the message' do
expect(myclass).to receive(:react_upon?).with('<some><xml>here</xml></some>')
myclass.process('<some><xml>here</xml></some>')
end
end
end
Right now your tests have no expectations so I added one that expects myclass to respiond_to the react_upon? method and another that expects myclass.process(xml) to respond with a String that equals yeah.

What is Camping::Server.start invoking in /bin/camping?

I'm studying how the Camping web framework works right now, and I don't understand what the Camping::Server.start at line 10 in /bin/camping is doing.
I expected this to call the start method in /lib/camping/server.rb at line 131, and so I put a simple puts 'hello' statement at the beginning of that method, expecting that statement to be invoked when I ran /bin/camping. However, I never saw my puts statement get called, so I can only assume that it's not that start method getting called.
I feel like I'm missing something obvious here. Here is the link to the camping github page and the relevant sections of code:
Github: https://github.com/camping/camping
From /bin/camping:
#!/usr/bin/env ruby
$:.unshift File.dirname(__FILE__) + "/../lib"
require 'camping'
require 'camping/server'
begin
Camping::Server.start
rescue OptionParser::ParseError => ex
puts "did it error"
STDERR.puts "!! #{ex.message}"
puts "** use `#{File.basename($0)} --help` for more details..."
exit 1
end
From /lib/server.rb:
def start
if options[:server] == "console"
puts "** Starting console"
#reloader.reload!
r = #reloader
eval("self", TOPLEVEL_BINDING).meta_def(:reload!) { r.reload!; nil }
ARGV.clear
IRB.start
exit
else
name = server.name[/\w+$/]
puts "** Starting #{name} on #{options[:Host]}:#{options[:Port]}"
super
end
end
My puts 'hello' on Camping::Server.start wasn't getting called because I didn't understand how static methods were defined in ruby.
start was being called statically, and I realize now that the start method I was looking at in the snippet wasn't a static method, which meant that another start method was getting called. I looked into Camping::Server and realized that it inherited from Rack::Server, which has the following method:
def self.start(options = nil)
new(options).start
end
That was the method getting called, not the one on /lib/camping/server.rb. I had been looking at the wrong method.

Resources