I am trying to understand why the result of these tests, the first test claims the method is not stubbed, however, the 2nd one is.
class Roll
def initialize
install if !installed?
end
def install; puts 'install'; end
end
describe Roll do
before do
class RollTestClass < Roll; end
RollTestClass.any_instance.stub(:install)
end
let(:roll_class) { RollTestClass }
let(:roll) { RollTestClass.new }
context 'when installed is true' do
before do
roll_class.any_instance.stub(:installed?).and_return(true)
end
it 'should not call install' do
expect(roll).to_not have_received(:install)
end
end
context 'when installed is false' do
before do
roll_class.any_instance.stub(:installed?).and_return(false)
end
it 'should call install' do
expect(roll).to have_received(:install)
end
end
end
It's also strange the error says expected to have received install, but I think that is likely just faulty feedback from the RSpec DSL. But maybe worth noting.
1) Roll when installed is true should not call install
Failure/Error: expect(roll).to_not have_received(:install)
#<RollTestClass:0x10f69ef78> expected to have received install, but that method has not been stubbed.
The "spy pattern" of RSpec requires that the objects have been previously stubbed. However, any_instance.stub doesn't actually stub the methods "for real" unless/until the method is invoked on a particular object. As such, the methods appears as being "unstubbed" and you get the error you're getting. Here's some code that demonstrates the change in definition:
class Foo
end
describe "" do
it "" do
Foo.any_instance.stub(:bar)
foo1 = Foo.new
foo2 = Foo.new
print_bars = -> (context) {puts "#{context}, foo1#bar is #{foo1.method(:bar)}, foo2#bar is #{foo2.method(:bar)}"}
print_bars['before call']
foo1.bar
print_bars['after call']
end
end
which produces the following output:
before call, foo1#bar is #<Method: Foo#bar>, foo2#bar is #<Method: Foo#bar>
after call, foo1#bar is #<Method: #<Foo:0x007fc0c3842ef8>.bar>, foo2#bar is #<Method: Foo#bar>
I reported this an issue on RSpec's github site and got this acknowledgement/response.
You can use the following alternative approach, which depends on the recently introduced expect_any_instance_of method.
class Roll
def initialize
install if !installed?
end
def install; puts 'install'; end
end
describe Roll do
before do
class RollTestClass < Roll; end
end
let(:roll_class) { RollTestClass }
let(:roll) { RollTestClass.new }
context 'when installed is true' do
before do
roll_class.any_instance.stub(:installed?).and_return(true)
end
it 'should not call install' do
expect_any_instance_of(roll_class).to_not receive(:install)
roll
end
end
context 'when installed is false' do
before do
roll_class.any_instance.stub(:installed?).and_return(false)
end
it 'should call install' do
expect_any_instance_of(roll_class).to receive(:install)
roll
end
end
end
Related
here is the class for which i'm writing a rspecs.
# frozen_string_literal: true. Thiis is the method **SiteLicenseService.get_package_for_site_license site_license_id, package_id**
module SiteLicenseGrants
# Raise an error if no site license is found for a given package
class Package
# Fail if the given packages are not found or if they are not associated
# with the site license
def self.valid_package?(opts)
package_id = opts[:package_id]
site_license_id = opts[:site_license_id]
return true if SiteLicenseService.get_package_for_site_license site_license_id, package_id
rescue Errors::EntityNotFound
raise Errors::NoSiteLicenseForPackage.new package_id # rubocop:disable Style/RaiseArgs
end
end
end
i want to stub a class method to return true.
require "rails_helper"
RSpec.describe SiteLicenseGrants::Package do
describe "check valid package" do
context "valid package" do
let(:package_id) { 1 }
let(:site_license_id) { 1 }
let(:opts) { { package_id: package_id, site_license_id: site_license_id } }
before do
site_license_service = class_double("SiteLicenseService")
allow(site_license_service).to receive(:get_package_for_site_license).with(site_license_id, package_id).and_return(true)
end
it "returns true" do
expect do
described_class.valid_package?(opts)
end.to be_truthy
end
end
context "invalid package" do
let(:opts) { { package_id: nil, site_license_id: nil } }
it "throws error" do
expect do
described_class.valid_package?(opts)
end.to raise_error(Errors::NoSiteLicenseForPackage)
end
end
end
end
here is the error im getting
Failures:
1) SiteLicenseGrants::Package check valid package valid package returns true
Failure/Error: raise Errors::NoSiteLicenseForPackage.new package_id # rubocop:disable Style/RaiseArgs
Errors::NoSiteLicenseForPackage:
Package 1 doesn't have a site license associated with it
I just want to mock my class method to return true. I dont want to test the class methods of SiteLicenseService. I dont want to create site license with package literally.
can anyone explain me what is the mistake i'm doing.
Thanks
Ensure the syntaxing of mocking the return value is correct:
allow(SiteLicenseService).to
receive(:get_package_for_site_license).and_return(true)
In Ruby, classes are written in TitleCase and methods are written in snake_case. The method to be received should be a :symbol.
I chnaged the stubbing like this and it started working
before do
allow(SiteLicenseService).to receive(:get_package_for_site_license).and_return(true)
end
now it does not look for a relation. but i appreciate if anyone tells me what changed internally.
When one of my it blocks fails, I want to run a cleanup step. When all of the it blocks succeed I don't want to run the cleanup step.
RSpec.describe 'my describe' do
it 'first it' do
logic_that_might_fail
end
it 'second it' do
logic_that_might_fail
end
after(:all) do
cleanup_logic if ONE_OF_THE_ITS_FAILED
end
end
How do I implement ONE_OF_THE_ITS_FAILED?
Not sure if RSpec provides something out of the box, but this would work:
RSpec.describe 'my describe' do
before(:all) do
#exceptions = []
end
after(:each) do |example|
#exceptions << example.exception
end
after(:all) do |a|
cleanup_logic if #exceptions.any?
end
# ...
end
I digged a little into the RSpec Code and found a way to monkey patch the RSpec Reporter class. Put this into your spec_helper.rb:
class RSpecHook
class << self
attr_accessor :hooked
end
def example_failed(example)
# Code goes here
end
end
module FailureDetection
def register_listener(listener, *notifications)
super
return if ::RSpecHook.hooked
#listeners[:example_failed] << ::RSpecHook.new
::RSpecHook.hooked = true
end
end
RSpec::Core::Reporter.prepend FailureDetection
Of course it gets a little more complex if you wish to execute different callbacks depending on the spec you're running at the moment.
Anyway, this way you do not have to mess up your testing code with exceptions or counters to detect failures.
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.
I am running rspec tests on a catalog object from within a Ruby app, using Rspec::Core::Runner::run:
File.open('/tmp/catalog', 'w') do |out|
YAML.dump(catalog, out)
end
...
unless RSpec::Core::Runner::run(spec_dirs, $stderr, out) == 0
raise Puppet::Error, "Unit tests failed:\n#{out.string}"
end
(The full code can be found at https://github.com/camptocamp/puppet-spec/blob/master/lib/puppet/indirector/catalog/rest_spec.rb)
In order to pass the object I want to test, I dump it as YAML to a file (currently /tmp/catalog) and load it as subject in my tests:
describe 'notrun' do
subject { YAML.load_file('/tmp/catalog') }
it { should contain_package('ppet') }
end
Is there a way I could pass the catalog object as subject to my tests without dumping it to a file?
I am not very clear as to what exactly you are trying to achieve but from my understanding I feel that using a before(:each) hook might be of use to you. You can define variables in this block that are available to all the stories in that scope.
Here is an example:
require "rspec/expectations"
class Thing
def widgets
#widgets ||= []
end
end
describe Thing do
before(:each) do
#thing = Thing.new
end
describe "initialized in before(:each)" do
it "has 0 widgets" do
# #thing is available here
#thing.should have(0).widgets
end
it "can get accept new widgets" do
#thing.widgets << Object.new
end
it "does not share state across examples" do
#thing.should have(0).widgets
end
end
end
You can find more details at:
https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/v/2-2/docs/hooks/before-and-after-hooks#define-before(:each)-block
I have the following class:
I want to ensure the class url is only set once for all instances.
class DataFactory
##url = nil
def initialize()
begin
if ##url.nil?
Rails.logger.debug "Setting url"
##url = MY_CONFIG["my value"]
end
rescue Exception
raise DataFactoryError, "Error!"
end
end
end
I have two tests:
it "should log a message" do
APP_CONFIG = {"my value" => "test"}
Rails.stub(:logger).and_return(logger_mock)
logger_mock.should_receive(:debug).with "Setting url"
t = DataFactory.new
t = nil
end
it "should throw an exception" do
APP_CONFIG = nil
expect {
DataFactory.new
}.to raise_error(DataFactoryError, /Error!/)
end
The problem is the second test never throws an exception as the ##url class variable is still set from the first test when the second test runs.
Even though I have se the instance to nil at the end of the first test garbage collection has not cleared the memory before the second test runs:
Any ideas would be great!
I did hear you could possibly use Class.new but I am not sure how to go about this.
describe DataFactory
before(:each) { DataFactory.class_variable_set :##url, nil }
...
end
Here is an alternative to the accepted answer, which while wouldn't solve your particular example, I'm hoping it might help a few people with a question in the same vein. If the class in question doesn't specify a default value, and remains undefined until set, this seems to work:
describe DataFactory
before(:each) do
DataFactory.remove_class_variable :##url if DataFactory.class_variable_defined? :##url
end
...
end
Works for me with a class with something more like:
def initialize
##url ||= MY_CONFIG["my value"]
...
end