I have a model which I would like to validate the name if it is part of an array that I get from somebody else's API.
class Model < ActiveRecord::Base
validate :exists_at_api?
def exists_at_api?
api_data.detect { |d| d == self.name }
end
end
The problem occurs when I send invalid data
The validation gets called, and returns false, but the model is still saved.
I also tried this variation of the above with the same results:
validate :name, if: :exists_at_api?
I'm sure this is something simple, can somebody point me in the right direction?
You need to add something to the errors hash to indicate the failure. See the Rails documentation for details and examples.
Try something like:
validate :exists_at_api?
def exists_at_api?
if api_data.detect { |d| d == self.name }
errors.add(:name, "can't be whatever...")
end
end
Related
I have recently started using Rubocop to "standardise" my code, and it has helped me optimise a lot of my code, as well as help me learn a lot of Ruby "tricks". I understand that I should use my own judgement and disable Cops where necessary, but I have found myself quite stuck with the below code:
def index
if params[:filters].present?
if params[:filters][:deleted].blank? || params[:filters][:deleted] == "false"
# if owned is true, then we don't need to filter by admin
params[:filters][:admin] = nil if params[:filters][:admin].present? && params[:filters][:owned] == "true"
# if admin is true, then must not filter by owned if false
params[:filters][:owned] = nil if params[:filters][:owned].present? && params[:filters][:admin] == "false"
companies_list =
case params[:filters][:admin]&.to_b
when true
current_user.admin_companies
when false
current_user.non_admin_companies
end
if params[:filters][:owned].present?
companies_list ||= current_user.companies
if params[:filters][:owned].to_b
companies_list = companies_list.where(owner: current_user)
else
companies_list = companies_list.where.not(owner: current_user)
end
end
else
# Filters for deleted companies
companies_list = {}
end
end
companies_list ||= current_user.companies
response = { data: companies_list.alphabetical.as_json(current_user: current_user) }
json_response(response)
end
Among others, the error that I'm getting is the following:
C: Metrics/AbcSize: Assignment Branch Condition size for index is too high. [<13, 57, 16> 60.61/15]
I understand the maths behind it, but I don't know how to simplify this code to achieve the same result.
Could someone please give me some guidance on this?
Thanks in advance.
Well first and foremost, is this code fully tested, including all the myriad conditions? It's so complex that refactoring will surely be disastrous unless the test suite is rigorous. So, write a comprehensive test suite if you don't already have one. If there's already a test suite, make sure it tests all the conditions.
Second, apply the "fat model skinny controller" paradigm. So move all the complexity into a model, let's call it CompanyFilter
def index
companies_list = CompanyFilter.new(current_user, params).list
response = { data: companies_list.alphabetical.as_json(current_user: current_user) }
json_response(response)
end
and move all those if/then/else statements into the CompanyFilter#list method
tests still pass? great, you'll still get the Rubocop warnings, but related to the CompanyFilter class.
Now you need to untangle all the conditions. It's a bit hard for me to understand what's going on, but it looks as if it should be reducible to a single case statement, with 5 possible outcomes. So the CompanyFilter class might look something like this:
class CompanyFilter
attr_accessors :current_user, :params
def initialize(current_user, params)
#current_user = current_user
#params = params
end
def list
case
when no_filter_specified
{}
when user_is_admin
#current_user.admin_companies
when user_is_owned
# etc
when # other condition
# etc
end
end
private
def no_filter_specified
#params[:filter].blank?
end
def user_is_admin
# returns boolean based on params hash
end
def user_is_owned
# returns boolean based on params hash
end
end
tests still passing? perfect! [Edit] Now you can move most of your controller tests into a model test for the CompanyFilter class.
Finally I would define all the different companies_list queries as scopes on the Company model, e.g.
class Company < ApplicationRecord
# some examples, I don't know what's appropriate in this app
scope :for_user, ->(user){ where("...") }
scope :administered_by, ->(user){ where("...") }
end
When composing database scopes ActiveRecord::SpawnMethods#merge is your friend.
Post.where(title: 'How to use .merge')
.merge(Post.where(published: true))
While it doesn't look like much it lets you programatically compose scopes without overelying on mutating assignment and if/else trees. You can for example compose an array of conditions and merge them together into a single ActiveRecord::Relation object with Array#reduce:
[Post.where(title: 'foo'), Post.where(author: 'bar')].reduce(&:merge)
# => SELECT "posts".* FROM "posts" WHERE "posts"."title" = $1 AND "posts"."author" = $2 LIMIT $3
So lets combine that with a skinny controllers approach where you handle filtering in a seperate object:
class ApplicationFilter
include ActiveModel::Attributes
include ActiveModel::AttributeAssignment
attr_accessor :user
def initialize(**attributes)
super()
assign_attributes(attributes)
end
# A convenience method to both instanciate and apply the filters
def self.call(user, params, scope: model_class.all)
return scope unless params[:filters].present?
scope.merge(
new(
permit_params(params).merge(user: user)
).to_scope
)
end
def to_scope
filters.map { |filter| apply_filter(filter) }
.compact
.select {|f| f.respond_to?(:merge) }
.reduce(&:merge)
end
private
# calls a filter_by_foo method if present or
# defaults to where(key => value)
def apply_filter(attribute)
if respond_to? "filter_by_#{attribute}"
send("filter_by_#{attribute}")
else
self.class.model_class.where(
attribute => send(attribute)
)
end
end
# Convention over Configuration is sexy.
def self.model_class
name.chomp("Filter").constantize
end
# filters the incoming params hash based on the attributes of this filter class
def self.permit_params
params.permit(filters).reject{ |k,v| v.blank? }
end
# provided for modularity
def self.filters
attribute_names
end
end
This uses some of the goodness provided by Rails to setup objects with attributes that will dynamically handle filtering attributes. It looks at the list of attributes you have declared and then slices those off the params and applies a method for that filter if present.
We can then write a concrete implementation:
class CompanyFilter < ApplicationFilter
attribute :admin, :boolean, default: false
attribute :owned, :boolean
private
def filter_by_admin
if admin
user.admin_companies
else
user.non_admin_companies
end
end
# this should be refactored to use an assocation on User
def filter_by_owned
case owned
when nil
nil
when true
Company.where(owner: user)
when false
Company.where.not(owner: user)
end
end
end
And you can call it with:
# scope is optional
#companies = CompanyFilter.call(current_user, params), scope: current_user.companies)
I've attempted to create a model, which needs to pass a series of validation tests in RSpec. However, I constantly get the error
expected #<Surveyor::Answer:0x0055db58e29260 #question=#<Double Surveyor::Question>, #value=5> to respond to `valid?`
My understanding (from here) was that 'valid?' checks that no errors were added to the model. I can't find any errors, however the message above persists.
This is my model
module Surveyor
class Answer
attr_accessor :question, :value
def initialize(params)
#question = params.fetch(:question)
#value = params.fetch(:value)
end
end
end
And the class Question
module Surveyor
class Question
attr_accessor :title, :type
def initialize(params)
#title = params.fetch(:title, nil)
#type = params.fetch(:type)
end
end
end
And this is the test I am attempting to pass
RSpec.describe Surveyor::Answer, '03: Answer validations' do
let(:question) { double(Surveyor::Question, type: 'rating') }
context "question validation" do
context "when the answer has a question" do
subject { described_class.new(question: question, value: 5) }
it { should be_valid }
end
end
Is my understanding of 'valid?' correct? Am I able to look at 'valid?' and perhaps see where I'm going wrong?
RSpec doesn't actually have a matcher called be_valid, instead it has some dynamic predicate matchers:
For any predicate method, RSpec gives you a corresponding matcher. Simply prefix the
method with be_ and remove the question mark. Examples:
expect(7).not_to be_zero # calls 7.zero?
expect([]).to be_empty # calls [].empty?
expect(x).to be_multiple_of(3) # calls x.multiple_of?(3)
so by calling it { should be_valid }, your subject has to respond to a valid? method. If you're testing an ActiveRecord model, those have a valid? method, but your model does not. So, if you want to test that your Answer is valid, you need to decide "what is a valid answer?" and write a method that checks for those conditions. If you want an API similar to Rails model, you might be interested in using ActiveModel::Validations
my model code is:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
after_create :create_node_for_user
def create_node_for_user
UserGraph.create(user_id: self.id)
end
end
and test for User model:
it "create node in graph database on user creation" do
userr = FactoryGirl.build(:user)
UserGraph.should_receive(:create).with(user_id: userr.id)
userr.save
end
but my test is failing with message
Failure/Error: userr.save
<UserGraph (class)> received :create with unexpected arguments
expected: ({:user_id=>nil})
got: ({:user_id=>94})
what might be wrong?
The explanation given by Yves is correct: the user id is nil until the record is saved because it is autogenerated by the DB. Here's an alternate approach:
it "create node in graph database on user creation" do
userr = FactoryGirl.build(:user)
create_args = nil
UserGraph.should_receive(:create) { |*args| create_args = args }
userr.save
expect(create_args).to eq(:user_id => userr.id)
end
Essentially, this moves the expectation about what the arguments should be so that it comes after the record has been saved, when the record has an id.
The Problem is that the userr you build with FactoryGirl does not have an ID. Thats why the expectation tells you that you expected :user_id=>nil. The ID will be generated when AR saves the record, so there is no way that you can guess the generated ID ahead of time. You could use a less restrictive assertion on the mock:
UserGraph.should_receive(:create).with(hash_including(:user_id))
This will verify that a hash is passed with a :user_id key. You can find more about hash_including here: http://rubydoc.info/gems/rspec-mocks/RSpec/Mocks/ArgumentMatchers:hash_including
Another thing you can try (not sure if it works) is to match against the kind_of matcher of rspec. This would make sure that a number was passed with :user_id
UserGraph.should_receive(:create).with(:user_id => kind_of(Numeric))
I'm having an issue with passing the generated JSON notation of my object to my Sinatra application. The problem I have is twofold:
I have 2 classes that are mapped to a database using the Sequel gem. When they generate JSON it is ok and properly implemented.
I have a custom class called registration that maps one of the classes with an additional field. The goal is to generate JSON out of this and pass that JSON to the application using cucumber (test purpose)
The application code responsible for handling the request has the following function defined:
post '/users' do
begin
hash = JSON.parse(self.request.body.read)
registration = Registration.new.from_json(#request.body.read)
registration.user.country = Database::Alaplaya.get_country_by_iso_code(registration.user.country.iso_code)
return 400 unless(registration.is_valid?)
id = Database::Alaplaya.create_user(registration.user)
# If the registration failed in our system, return a page 400.
return 400 if id < 1
end
problem 1: I cannot use the params hash. It exists but is just an empty hash. Why?
problem 2: I cannot deserialize the JSON generated by the class itself. Why?
The registration class looks like this:
require 'json'
class Registration
attr_accessor :user, :project_id
def to_json(*a)
{
'json_class' => self.class.name,
'data' => [#user.to_json(*a), #project_id]
}.to_json(*a)
end
def self.json_create(o)
new(*o['data'])
end
# Creates a new instance of the class using the information provided in the
# hash. If a field is missing in the hash, nil will be assigned to that field
# instead.
def initialize(params = {})
#user = params[:user]
#project_id = params[:project_id]
end
# Returns a string representing the entire Registration.
def inspect
"#{#user.inspect} - #{#user.country.inspect} - #{#project_id}"
end
# Returns a boolean valid representing whether the Registration instance is
# considered valid for the API or not. True if the instance is considered
# valid; otherwise false.
def is_valid?
return false if #user.nil? || #project_id.nil?
return false if !#user.is_a?(User) || !#project_id.is_a?(Fixnum)
return false if !#user.is_valid?
true
end
end
I had to implement the methods to generate the JSON output correctly. When I run this in console I get the following output generated:
irb(main):004:0> r = Registration.new(:user => u, :project_id => 1)
=> new_login - nil - 1
irb(main):005:0> r.to_json
=> "{\"json_class\":\"Registration\",\"data\":[\"{\\\"json_class\\\":\\\"User\\\
",\\\"login\\\":\\\"new_login\\\"}\",1]}"
Which looks like valid JSON to me. However when I POST this to the application server and try to parse this, JSON complains that at least 2 octets are needed and refuses to deserialize the object.
If you're using Sequel as your ORM, try something like this:
In your model:
class Registration < Sequel::Model
many_to_one :user
many_to_one :project
plugin :json_serializer
end
The server:
before do
#data = JSON.parse(request.body.read) rescue {}
end
post '/users' do
#registration = Registration.new #data
if #registration.valid?
#registration.save
#registration.to_json #return a JSON representation of the resource
else
status 422 #proper status code for invalid input
#registration.errors.to_json
end
end
I think you may be overcomplicating your registration process. If the HTTP action is POST /users then why not create a user? Seems like creating a registration is overly complex. Unless your user already exists, in which case POST /users would be incorrect. If what you're really intending to do is add a user to to a project, then you should PUT /projects/:project_id/users/:user_id and the action would look something like this:
class User < Sequel::Model
many_to_many :projects
end
class Project < Sequel::Model
many_to_many :users
end
#make sure your db schema has a table called users_projects or projects_users
put '/projects/:project_id/users/:user_id' do
#find the project
#project = Project.find params[:project_id]
raise Sinatra::NotFound unless #project
#find the user
#user = Project.find params[:project_id]
raise Sinatra::NotFound unless #user
#add user to project's users collection
#project.add_user #user
#send a new representation of the parent resource back to the client
#i like to include the child resources as well
#json might look something like this
#{ 'name' : 'a project name', 'users' : ['/users/:user_id', '/users/:another_user_id'] }
#project.to_json
end
I am trying to Mock an object that is being passed into another object, and am having no success. Can someone show me what I am doing wrong?
class Fetcher
def download
return 3
end
end
class Reports
def initialize(fetcher)
#fetcher = fetcher
end
def status
#fetcher.download
end
end
describe Reports do
before(:each) do
end
it "should get get status of 6" do
Fetcher.should_receive(:download).and_return(6)
f = Reports.new(Fetcher.new)
f.status.should == 6
end
end
The spec still reports status returning 3, not my intended 6.
Certainly I am missing something here. Any thoughts?
In the test, what I think you're trying to do is this (I think)
it '...' do
some_fetcher = Fetcher.new
some_fetcher.should_receive(:download).and_return(6)
f = Reports.new(some_fetcher)
f.status.should == 6
end
when you say Fetcher.should_receive(:download), you're saying the CLASS should receive the call 'download', instead of INSTANCES of the class...
Hope this helps! If it's not clear, just let me know!
An updated based on the new syntax.
subject(:reports) { described_class.new(fetcher) }
let(:fetcher} { double("Fetcher") }
describe "#status" do
it "gets status of 6" do
fetcher.stub(download: 6)
expect(reports.status).to == 6
end
end