I know in Rails I can do something like
app.get 'url'
app.response
But this does not work in Padrino, nor do any of the regular controller calls because Padrino uses different controller methods than Rails.
What I'm trying to do is test my controller methods from the Ruby Padrino MRI console. For example, I want to store the objects present, call the same method 100 times, then compare what objects are left behind. I'm trying to find a memory leak.
So it would be great to be able to call the method from a Padrino console.
I can't find anything that tells me how to do it in the official documentation or elsewhere.
The get in you Padrino::Application is just part of the DSL to define new routes, not to retrieve their contents. What you are trying to achieve is usually part of the Rack::Test library.
Have a look at the Sinatra documentation:
http://www.sinatrarb.com/testing.html
Specially compare the sections about Rack::Test with Mixin VS without Mixin. That should make you understand where the fetching get comes from.
In your case, if you want to test from the console, then it should be something like this part:
require 'rack/test'
browser = Rack::Test::Session.new(Rack::MockSession.new(Padrino::Application))
browser.get '/'
Now, where you see Padrino::Application you must type your own application main class that inherits from that class, not the abstract class itself
Notice that the result will be a Rack::MockSession object, so if you just want to see the html do:
browser.get('/').body
Related
I have a class defined in a gem to which I am adding some methods via refinements (in Ruby 2.3.0). This class turns up in some Sinatra views (haml).
When I refer to these extra methods in a helper, there is not a problem. But in the view, I get an Undefined Method error.
Am I missing a trick, or is it that the using ... statement would need to go somewhere I just can't get to?
(Workaround: I can define helper methods to return the method on the object. But if I wanted to do that then I wouldn't have used refinements...)
The scope of refinement is determined lexically. Unless you rewrite the method inside haml that calls that method so that it becomes within the scope of the using command, you cannot use refinements. But I guess haml is internally using eval or something like that to evaluate the code you write in a haml file. In that case, it is impossible.
I am trying to use Grape to create an API using only Ruby objects. I do not want to use a database/Rails/ActiveSupport/etc -- just Rack, Ruby, and Grape.
I have defined a class for a Directory that I want to interact with through the API. So Directory#sort_by("last_name") returns JSON data with a list of People objects in my Directory. I also have a method Directory#create_person(attributes) that takes a string and uses it to add Person objects to the Directory. The directory is populated with people upon creation.
I am new to working with Rack and Grape, so I'm not sure where/how to create my Directory object and have it accessible through the GETs/POSTs in my Grape API class. Using a class variable inside this class appears to work, i.e.,:
module API
class DirectoryAPI < Grape::API
format 'json'
##directory = Directory.new("1.txt", "2.txt", "3.txt")
get 'last_name' do
##directory.sort_by("last_name")
end
end
end
but using class variables just seems wrong. Is there any better/cleaner way to create my Directory object? Perhaps inside my config.ru file? Or could I do it through a class method inside of Directory somehow?
What you are looking for is a singleton:
Usually singletons are used for centralized management of internal or external resources and they provide a global point of access to themselves.
Unfortunately, Ruby just doesn't play well with singletons. But you can use a "class consisting of only class methods," the second strategy advocated in this article.
I believe that you are working on a coding challenge that I completed a few months ago. In my answer, I used a "class consisting of only class methods" called API::Store. Here's the output from rspec -fd:
API::Store
::add
adds record to store
appends data line to file
::has_line?
instantiates a record from the data line
without the record in the store
should equal false
with the record in the store
should equal true
::new
should raise NoMethodError
::records
with original file
on initial access
should eq Records
on subsequent access
should eq Records
when file replaced
should eq OtherRecords
Finished in 0.07199 seconds (files took 2.68 seconds to load)
9 examples, 0 failures
Note that Store can't be instantiated; it throws a NoMethodError if you try. That's not a problem, though. In the Grape endpoint you can call Store.records to access the data.
As for sorting the records, this should be done in another class. Why should a Store or a Directory be sorting the data in its files?
Finally, you asked where to do the initial preparation (not initialization, of course). You can prepare your singleton in config.ru, so that it is ready when the application starts:
# config.ru
# load application code here
file = File.open('data/records.txt', 'a+')
at_exit { file.close }
API::Store.file = file
run API::Base
The challenge's instructions say "You may use any resources you need to complete it," so presumably, asking on Stack Overflow is allowed. If you are doing this challenge for a job application, please do mention so when you ask questions, because it's only fair for those answering to be informed. It would be wise to also mention at your interview that you got help on SO. Good luck, and happy coding.
The main problem I see with your example is not the use of class variables exactly, but instantiating your data inline in the API controller code. Ideally the data should be more self-contained, so you can access the exact same data from other places in your code. If you make an API similar to a light-weight data access module, then you will be using a familiar pattern in your route controllers - also it will become easy to migrate to using SQL or other data store if and when you need to.
There are lots of valid approaches, but I might create a new singleton object to represent your data source, and connect that to your hard-coded data as if it were tables. The end result here would feel a little like using Sequel (but you could follow any other pattern that you prefer):
inline_data.rb
module InlineDB
TABLES = Hash[
:directory => Directory.new("1.txt", "2.txt", "3.txt")
]
def self.[] table_name
TABLES[table_name]
end
end
app.rb
require_relative 'inline_data' # actual path may be more structured
module API
class DirectoryAPI < Grape::API
format 'json'
get 'last_name' do
InlineDB[:directory].sort_by("last_name")
end
end
end
I am new to automation and I have started using Watir Webdriver to automate a website. However, there are certain pieces of code which can be reused for multiple test cases. How can I group the reusable pieces of code into a method which I can call in every test case ? Could you please provide references or examples ?
You are interested in methods.
Here is an example:
def automation_snippet
#browser.text_field(:id => 'field_id').set 'foo'
end
Later you will probably be interested in classes, page objects, and modules.
This is basic ruby stuff. You will need to make sure that whatever method you want to use is in scope, too.
So, keywords to start with are methods and scope. If you are using Cucumber, then you can define methods in any step definition file and they will be available in all your other Cucumber tests.
I've written a small method to query and retrieve from an MS SQL 2008 server and I am not sure where to put the code in my rails app.
The scenario:
I am writing a Ruby and Rails app with a connection to a legacy MS SQL 2008 server DB.
A lot is working as expected, which is nice.
For now I work off a copy of the legacy DB and I treat it as readonly. It's big (7000+ tables some of which have over 40 million records). I am using it 'as-is' and don't want to change any of the underlying schema.
I do want to extend some very server-specific functionality. For instance, I make use of:
thing = ActiveRecord::Base.connection.exec_query(my_query_string_here)
... and it works. The result is an array that contains a hash and I can get to the relevant hash value by using:
thing[0][""]
... which works.
So, I thought I should write a method to make this easier and I wrote:
Class Tool < ActiveRecord::Base
def self.queryRDW(x)
res=ActiveRecord::Base.connection.exec_query(x)
ret=res.to_hash
return ret[0][""]
end
end
and put it in config/initializers/tool.rb Unfortunately, webrick complains about the file during boot with the following cryptic error:
.../config/initializers/tool.rb:7: syntax error, unexpected keyword_end, expecting $end (SyntaxError)
I recognize that this is not an out-of-the-box rails-way of doing things, so please don't remind me. (My struggles remind me often enough)
My question:
Where should I put this code so that I can invoke it from within a controller or a view in my rails app? Does this need to be a new Class method or something else?
Many thanks!
Addendum:
I changed Class to class (doh!)
I moved tool.rb into lib/
I changed tool.rb to now be:
module Tool
def self.queryRDW(x)
res = ActiveRecord::Base.connection.exec_query(x)
res.to_hash[0][""]
end
end
but doing this in app/views/stats.html.erb
thing=queryRDW("mysql string")
gets me an 'undefined method error'
Addendum 2
I made the directory app/concerns and put tool.rb there.
When I use:
<%=queryRDW("myStringHere")%>
in:
app/views/stats.html.erb
I get:
undefined method `queryRDW' for #<#<Class:0x0000000378ccf8>:0x00000003c1ce58>
You need to lowercase the keyword class in line 1.
I'd also say that this class doesn't need to inherit from ActiveRecord::Base — and doesn't even really need to be a class — if it's simply a wrapper around exec_query. There's nothing "wrong" with this, but if you never intend to instantiate an object of this class, you could just create a simple utility module:
module Tool
def self.queryRDW(x)
res = ActiveRecord::Base.connection.exec_query(x)
res.to_hash[0][""]
end
end
You can save this file in a couple of places:
lib/tool.rb. If you're using Rails 3, you'll need to add (or uncomment) this line in config/application.rb:
# config/application.rb
config.autoload_paths += %W(#{config.root}/lib)
app/concerns/tool.rb. This will automatically be detected by Rails 3.
I generally use app/concerns for tools that are entirely application-specific and lib for utilities that I might reuse among several different applications.
I wouldn't put this in config/initializers. This seems like code you'd put in app/models.
The error you're getting is syntax related, so double check the syntax.
To answer your question more directly, though, it's acceptable to put this stuff in your model if it's model related (in other words, part of your business domain). If it is something extraneous or orthogonal to your domain, I'd put it in lib.
Hope this helps.
I am using Rails Warden plugin. It defines a helper method 'user' that returns current user. See the link for the source code.
Now I have an business logic object that does not have any reference to the controller. But I would like to get the current user. Is there any way of accessing this?
I have tried
ActionController::Base.helpers.user
or even
RailsWarden::Mixins::HelperMethods.user
with no luck. Thanks.
Now I have an business logic object
that does not have any reference to
the controller. But I would like to
get the current user. Is there any way
of accessing this?
So why can't you just pass the current user to those methods?
Additionally you can mix them in.
I strongly discourage you to write the static helpers (it is not Java, it is Ruby!).
Instead, where you need those helpers include them as a module:
module SuperLogic
def calculate_stuff(current_user=nil)
(current_user || user || self).bills.sum
end
edn
Then include this where you need it:
# user model
class User
include SuperLogic
#it will get the `calculate_stuff` method
end
# controller
include SuperLogic
# so you can use it as one of
calculate_stuff user
calculate_stuff
and so on...
additionally where you access your business logic, you can just create an instance of the class instead of "static" methods (in ruby they are "class" methods):
# controller
def calculate
#result = BusinessLogic.new(user).calculate_stuff
end
This is probably the easiest thing you can do.
Really, you don't need to access whole HTTP context in your business objects (I'm not even talking about testing it).
The way I think of business logic, it's something that sits between the controller and the model. I think it would be ok to pass an instance of the request to the logic methods, and since you're using warden, you can get the user from 'request.env['warden'].user'.
I haven't encountered a good reason not to have logic methods be static (self.) methods of a module. Maybe Dmytrii's suggestion works for you, but I prefer to 'require' than to dynamically include one-off logic bits.