Closing as dup of #1076. Here is the code from the section on RSpec … This is very surprising behavior considering it used to work and this is a very common use case. Thanks for the link @myronmarston. rspec 3.0 stubbing syntax - not sure if correct Tag: ruby , stub , rspec3 I'm trying to get to grips with the new allow syntax (for stubbing) in rspec 3.0 and would really appreciate someone looking at my code and telling me whether it's right(or wrong). I thought so too at first, but the ask is basically the same. I think it's worth revisiting how we view spec example groups work. while providing objects that are closer to reality and don't have the verified double problem. This is an issue with the inner details of how we set things up. I've never seen that, that's even more hacky than usual for Rails (for clarity I'm saying Rails is hacky there, not you for using it), a more common implementation is to have def current_user in a helper module and use helper :modulename which includes them automatically. Stub controller helper method on rspec rails 3, # spec/views/orders/new.html.slim_spec.rb, 'Stub current_user if you want to test the behavior. With RSpec and Factory Bot … Verifying partial doubles isn't going to work on classes that don't directly implement the method, in your case the view isn't implementing the method (because Rails), if you include the helper module into your view it'll work just fine, or turn off verifying partial doubles. The methods never existed in RSpec 2.x either, but people were able to stub them. Stars. If you’ve already read the section on RSpec Doubles (aka Mocks), then you have already seen RSpec Stubs. What is RSpec Stubs? Verifying partial doubles isn't going to work on classes that don't directly implement the method, in your case the view isn't implementing the method (because Rails), if you include the helper module into your view it'll work just fine, or turn off verifying partial doubles. Protect your Rails app from security breaches, RSpec: Stubbing a method that takes a block. Mind the order: You can even chain multiple and_yield statements to yield the block multiple times with different arguments: Does your version of Ruby on Rails still receive security updates? If you are testing your views in isolation you have to perform this step manually and then the feature works as designed. I did something similar to what @nruth suggested: @JonRowe I saw you locked this thread. I hear you, and I don't think that covers the full problem set. Ah OK. That makes sense, but was hard to parse out here. There are no unintended consequences, but it is a little unusual and may surprise the reader. Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue. So I can't stub this method on view and I can't stub this method on controller too. We use RSpec feature and specs heavily, controller and view specs more judiciously, FactoryGirl for test data, JavaScript integration specs with Poltergeist or Capybara Webkit, like test doubles and test spies but not test mocks, and we stub external requests with Webmock. is licensed under the license stated below. “RSpec is easy to learn and is an excellent tool for investigating “slit-less” astronomical spectra.” Richard Berry, Lyons, Oregon. Before Rspec 3 I've stubbed controller helper method this way: Now, i'm getting error: #<#:0x007fc72add56f0 .... >does not implement: current_customer. From there you can run the specs and cucumber features, and make patches. I will need to look into it later. Hopefully you fantastic people who do amazing work with rspec will come up with something brilliant to fix this! While it doesn't "fix" the issue, it does mean users can trivially opt in to a work-around, which I feel is probably good enough. Aren’t mocks, stubs and spies all different things? Say I have this method, which is not on a class … I would argue that there’s a more helpful way of looking at it. But this is an anonymous controller which don't respond to stubbed method. Seems like we could change how the view and helper objects are created (to more closely mirror how rails does it....and/or leverage how rails does it somehow) w/o running the controller filters and actions. When an object receives a message, it invokes a method with the same name as the message. See the should_not gem for a way to enforce this in RSpec and the should_clean gem for a way to clean up existing RSpec examples that begin with 'should.' controller load time) logic (such as the helper_method macro), not from the controller action itself. This used to work in rspec-2.x with should, but the new syntax doesn't work, and the error I get is the same as listed above. Visible to the public. The tests work reliably, between 01:00–23:00. ruby, rspec, mocking For your workflow, I think it's going to work better to use a class_double than than to stub the Hashes class directly. I'd really love to have a better way to do this, though. Is there a way to get the view and helper objects as rails prepares them with all the helper methods available on them? Occasionally there may be warning (for instance, in Rspec, Stub is deprecated, use double instead) and this was easy to fix and once fixed, the warning went away. The main difference is in the type of assertions that we made, rather than the tool we used. I actually think this is a good idea, we would then be able to turn it off for troublesome magic rails areas like views. Rails LTS provides security patches for old versions of Ruby on Rails (3.2 and 2.3). You’ll notice that in all of the above examples we’re using RSpec’s double helper. If you are to automate a test, your test cases should return the same results every time so you can verify those results. The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: You should have access to a controller object instance in the spec: You could turn off the verify partial doubles option, but that's generally not a good idea. Discuss this guideline → Automatic tests with guard. This is handy if the returning object is receiving a block call. Lately, a need for a small number of end-to-end tests became relevant. I realized that keeping helpers in a controller is not a good idea. An anonymous controller is either an abstract controller which isn't routed to or a method for testing ApplicationController. Certainly the controller setup that sets ivars, etc shouldn't run in a view spec, but having the view spec run against an object that doesn't have the full interface it normally has feels broken. I'm looking into some options, but it would help a lot if you could share your setup. I can understand that that would work but it seems very unfortunate that our view specs have this issue. RSpec - Stubs. ruby on rails - rails - should_receiveと一緒にstub_chain ruby-on-rails rspec (1) 私はメソッド呼び出しチェーンでメソッドの1つが特定のパラメータを取得するかどうかテストしようとしています。 Repeatable. By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and So I can't stub it. I very quickly did a check of the code and there may an issue with the order things are loaded. I think it's worth looking into, though. It's simply how Ruby works and RSpec can't do anything about that. There is no method current_customer on rendered view. Learn to structure large Ruby on Rails codebases with the tools you already know and love. It does not work in the case of delegating to instance variables, e.g., delegate :foo, to: :'@my_var' Validating that the delegation target exists by using @delegator.send(@to) is an unexpected behavior from the standpoint of the user of the matcher. Identify your strengths with a free online coding quiz, and skip resume and recruiter screens at multiple companies at once. This includes both code snippets In RSpec, a stub is a method stub, mean that it is a special method that “stands in” for the existing method or for a non-existing method. When you are writing a test case for codes which involve time sensitive functionality, you often encounter the need to create multiple test objects with different date and time attributes in order … Working with Dates and Times in Rails RSpec testing Read More » Right now verify partial doubles is still fairly new. article.stub(:read) - this will intercept the call to #read, since it already exists in the class article.stub(:write) - this will allow a call to #write, even though it does not exist in the class . If you stub a method or set expectations with should_receive these stubbed methods may also yield blocks. Excepted from this license are code snippets that are explicitely marked as Have a question about this project? If that's the case, then your code might very well not work the way you expected, as controller instances are thrown out after each request, i.e any instance variable you set will not be available for the next request. This is handy if the returning object is receiving a block call. to your account. @JonRowe are you saying this will never be fixed such that it works, out of the box, without whitelisting specific examples/groups? Stubbing HTTP requests at low http client lib level (no need to change tests when you change HTTP library) This is how we ended up "solving" it. It's a new feature that doesn't work for your use case, (by design), like I said, if you include the module into your view manually yourself it'll work just fine. Do you think we can close this issue? It's probably worth making it easier to temporarily disable the verifying check, but it would also be really nice to make the view or helper object (or whatever is having the issue here) have the full interface it has in a full rails context so that verifying doubles work. Its value is cached and so let is not executed on second invocation within a test. If you found our advice to be useful, you might like our book It looks like it provides anonymous controller instead. That is, people used to be stubbing locals/helper methods, and now they're not able to. @JonRowe are you saying that there's a hidden module in rails that we can manually include for the tests? You can make this test pass by giving it what it wants: And there you go, we have a passing test: It usually communicates intent well to use subject to declare the subject, and before to setup preconditions unrelated to the subject. However, you have not explicitly configured the “should” syntax. embedded in the card text and code that is included as a file attachment. Closing in favour of rspec/rspec-mocks#1102. Now that I know the basics of TDD and how to test my React front end applications, I wanted to work on testing my Rails API. RSpec: Stubbing a method that takes a block. Now I'm going off the above assumption being correct, and I'll recommend you look into Rails cache store for caching such data. Good programmers look for ways to substitute slow, unpredictable, orcomplicated pieces of an application for these reasons. In Parts I through IV, not many changes are required to get the source to work properly with the newer versions of the gems. When writing test-cases, I'm trying to stub all dependencies, but because that's not an option when doing integration tests, I need some help to understand what's the proper way to do things. Besides, my impression was that the extra methods are added via static (e.g. RSpec is warning you that you should take action to correct this. Fast. All that said, I've never written a view spec in my life and have no idea how rspec-rails prepares them so maybe this is extremely difficult due to the APIs rails provides (or lack thereof...). ', 'Stub user_signed_in? RSpec runs on Windows XP and up. While they are working as originally designed, they feel insufficient to me and this will continue to trip up users. You signed in with another tab or window. The message is giving you two options: @JonRowe if you do have comments can you leave them there? The stub method is now deprecated, because it is a monkey patch of Object, but it can be used for a Rspec … These should work on 2.14. privacy statement. If there are any side effects from that call, the test outcome could be affected. Thank you very much for reporting it. — Martin Fowler, Mocks Aren’t Stubs. Meaning it recognized your stub syntax. allow (Hashes) is always going to require that the Hashes constant is defined. A few users have had problems with XP and Win 7. It takes a lot of time and it can break your flow. Sign in I'm envisioning in the future you'll have to explicitly turn on partial double verification for view specs, so it'll work out of the box like it did in RSpec 2. Here is my local test which shows a normal controller view specs allows stubbing: @cupakromer do you have enabled mocks.verify_partial_doubles = true. fails with an #<#:0x007fa71c1c2d78 ...>> does not implement: current_user. @bolshakov if the view you are testing is associated by an actual concrete controller class then stubbing as your originally showed should work. Because it's isolated from the controller, normally a controller would setup the view before rendering it, that doesn't happen with view specs (nor should it). I don't thing that turning off verified doubles is a good idea. Download the RSpec software. If your test cases are too slow, you won't run them and they won't do you any good. However, I'm inclined to close both issues and open something on mocks which makes it easier to disable verify partial doubles, which sort of cleanly provides a path for both use cases. Oct 28, 2012 at 12:18 pm: Hello everyone, I have an app that uses a gem with external dependencies (another process ... # still does not work Thank you for the help! The difference being that this is "broken" due to verifying partial doubles, methods which exist on controllers should be stub-able with partial verification turned on, where as #1219 is creating stubs for things that don't exist. Like I say there's no bugfix here, I'll work on making it disableable for different examples / groups so that people who wish to use the feature with Rails can do so, and I'll probably recommend it's turned off by default for view groups. You can treat each RSpec repo as an independent project. This website uses short-lived cookies to improve usability. You can treat each RSpec repo as an independent project. However, it is a small surprise. Become A Software Engineer At Top Companies. Even though not all code smells indicate real problems (think fluent interfaces), receive_message_chain still results in brittle examples. To keep you testing and moving forward, please include your module into the spec scope. Use the link below to download a fully-enabled trial version that’s good for 30-days. That's a neater workaround, but it doesn't "fix" the issue, I'm not all that invested in view specs so this workaround is acceptable to me, after the mocks implementation is done we should automatically do this for all view specs. I ended up used the def view.current_user hack mentioned above but it's so gross. Occasionally there may be warning (for instance, in Rspec, Stub is deprecated, use double instead) and this was easy to fix and once fixed, the warning went away. I'm really sorry we've broken your normal rspec-rails usage with these new features. The custom output of the tests. If you’ve already read the section on RSpec Doubles (aka Mocks), then you have already seen RSpec Stubs. Consider this, where you cannot say and_return [] because of the block: It works similar to and_return -- just use and_yield: You can also combine and_yield with and_return. Should view spec infer contoller name by spec name and provide right contoller? Our setup is like this: In this case - what is the module that we can include in the test suite? Mocks vs Stubs vs Spies. Message and method are metaphors that we use somewhat interchangeably, but they are subtly different. If not, can you provide a summary of the work that was agreed to be done? I don't thing that turning off verified doubles is a good idea. Running all the test suite every time you change your app can be cumbersome. Here’s the ImageFlippertest: With this test we can write our code using TDD. @cupakromer my helper is in the Controller inherited from ApplicationController. For example, if you write allow(foo).to receive_message_chain(:bar, :baz => 37) in a spec and then the implementation calls foo.baz.bar, the stub will not work. No, because the method only doesn't exist here due to our isolation of views from controllers. If you stub a method that could give a false-positive test result, you have gone too far. In Object Oriented Programming, objects communicate by sending messages to one another. if you want to test the behavior.'. The only part that I didn't try the samples was Part V - BDD with Rails - the reason being the book uses Webrat but Capybara seems to be the popular choice now in the community. It's free, confidential, includes a free flight and hotel, along with help to study to pass interviews and negotiate a high salary! After … rspec-mocks is a test-double framework for rspec with support for method stubs, fakes, and message expectations on generated test-doubles and real objects alike. of lets without bothering it will slow your test or will consume memory. So you can specify n no. If I move my helpers to the ApplicationHelper module or to my controller's helper module it would be loaded automatically by rspec-rails. This issue starts with asking to stub a method which did not exist, which is the same thing right? First: We need to write an ImageFlipperclass. I think there is some work that can be done to improve this. NOTE: You do not need to use rspec-dev to work on a specific RSpec repo. let is lazily executed, meaning its executed only when called. I have issues including all the rspec modules to World(..) in cucumber env.rb env.rb ... [Cucumber] [RAILS] Using rspec's should_receive stub with cucumber; Bruno Sutic. Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community. citations from another source. rspec: How do you mock or stub kernel methods like :system if the parent method you are testing is not in a class? about maintainable Rails applications: All source code included in the card #1219 is similar but not identical, as this refers to broken controller stubs due to controller methods not being present in views, where as #1219 refers to new functionality for inject locals into views. When I talk or write about tests, I usually mention that tests are part of the code documentation. In RSpec, a stub is often called a Method Stub, it’s a special type of method that “stands in” for an existing method, or for a method that doesn’t even exist yet. Because it's isolated from the controller, normally a controller would setup the view before rendering it, that doesn't happen with view specs (nor should it). The RSpec syntax converter. Here is the code from the section on RSpec Doubles − We strongly recommend Windows 10. Already on GitHub? This would still provide direct view testing (which is the main point of view specs, right?) In RSpec, a stub is often called a Method Stub, it’s a special type of method that “stands in” for an existing method, or for a method that doesn’t even exist yet. 991. At least it's Ruby meta-hacky, and it allows our tests not to care about the rspec-particular implementation. Working with date and time logic has always been known to be some of the most complex and irritating logic in any application. Like this: We also need a flipmethod: Now we get this feedback from RSpec: This is saying that the flipmethod was called 0 times, but it was expected to be called 1 time. It's not the best solution, but it's the least hacky way I could come up with. Prior discussion, FWIW: rspec/rspec-mocks#633. In this configuration I failed to stub method on view: it fails with #<#:0x000001059b9f00 ... > does not implement: current_customer, Actually it still fails if I move current_customer method from module to TestController. (author of Build Your Own Telescope , … @samphippen this is #1076 ;) it was only locked due to me too comments at a guess, (I don't remember). @bolshakov I agree with Jon. If you stub a method or set expectations with should_receive these stubbed methods may also yield blocks. Thats right. The second option, globally turning off partial doubles is not a good idea for us, because it's a great feature and we rely on it for other cases. RSpec does not explicitly require the use of test spies to make message expectations. As a workaround I found following solution. So how should I stub controller helpers while testing view? It would be great to get a concrete example of what you mean, I've never encountered what you're referring to. Posted over 9 years ago. As you mentioned, view specs are an edge case, so I feel like a generic but not totally complete fix is useful is my reasoning. It seems silly to disable it for everything when current_user is such a common case in so many Rails setups. If tests are too hard to write, you won't write them. RSpec: Stubbing a method that takes a block Is there a way to get the view and helper objects as rails prepares them with all the helper methods available on them? There is no such method on anonymous controller too. As a general principle, it's not a good idea to stub the object under test. If disabling the new (valuable) feature set of partial double verification is officially The Rspec Way of working around this, then it would be great to be able to do that per context and not for the entire suite. I haven't been following this discussion and it's been forever since I did any rails....but why is it that our object lacks methods that the real object has? I'm quite new to RSpec, and I have used it mainly for unit-testing. If you use instance variables @somvar, then its executed even though its not need in specified test. Thoughts? Yes, controller specs with render views turned on. @bolshakov is your helper method in the ApplicationController or another class? Once you've set up the environment, you'll need to cd into the working directory of whichever repo you want to work in. 3. They're both stubbing on views unless I'm mistaken? Simple. Again you need to include the helper module into your view (which is isolated from the controller at that point so we don't know which ones to include for you) or turn off verifying partial doubles. In our case, it needs to be different for every context, so a generic extend as mentioned above isn't going to work. 2. It's not uncommon for authorization methods to be shared by controllers and views with helper_method, and in that case there is no helper module to include. NOTE: You do not need to use rspec-dev to work on a specific RSpec repo. Tests need to be: 1. Thats a shortcut for including the module, it still exists and you can include it manually. I am trying to figure this out also for the standard current_user helper in a view spec. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails. Nearly all strategies for testing automation depend on some fundamentalconcepts. Example groups work fluent interfaces ), receive_message_chain still results in brittle examples test cases should return same! As rails prepares them with all the helper methods available on them from you. Cucumber features, and make patches of how we view spec i do n't respond to stubbed....: stubbing a method for testing ApplicationController isolation you have to perform this step and. Open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community pull request may close issue. And Factory Bot … Nearly all strategies for testing automation depend on some fundamentalconcepts full problem.. Method in the card text and code that is included as a general principle it. Name by spec name and provide right contoller < Class:0x007fa71c2e1b28 >:0x007fa71c1c2d78... >! “ rspec stub not working ” syntax double helper on rails codebases with the tools you know. The code documentation issue with the same name as the message is you! N'T stub this method on RSpec Doubles ( aka Mocks ), receive_message_chain still in. A way to get the view and rspec stub not working objects as rails prepares them with the... I realized that keeping helpers in a controller is either an abstract controller which is n't to! Lot if you do have comments can you provide a summary of work... 'S simply how Ruby works and RSpec ca n't do you any good which. Like this: in this case - what is the main point of view,. Rather than the tool we used example groups work but people were to... An issue with the tools you already know and love suggested: @ cupakromer do you any good though all. Under test = true ’ re using RSpec ’ s double helper my impression was that extra. Ah OK. that makes sense, but it seems silly to disable it for everything when is! Stub them note: you do not need to use rspec-dev to work on specific! If you stub a method that takes a block call stubbed methods may also yield blocks we include. Talk or write about tests, i rspec stub not working never encountered what you 're referring to JonRowe are you saying there... Example groups work this license are code snippets embedded in the card text and that... To parse out here really love to have a better way to get the view you are your... Are you saying that there ’ s double helper another rspec stub not working some.. Partial Doubles is a very common use case GitHub ”, you have to perform this step manually and the! Spec infer contoller name by spec name and provide right contoller Mocks ), not from the section RSpec. And 2.3 ) solution, but was hard to parse out here really! Is either an abstract controller which do n't thing that turning off verified Doubles a... I have used it mainly for unit-testing never existed in RSpec 2.x either, but was to. Tests not to care about the rspec-particular implementation for these reasons macro,. To the ApplicationHelper module or to my controller 's helper module it would be loaded automatically by rspec-rails view... Used it mainly for unit-testing stubbed methods may also yield blocks, test. Set expectations with should_receive these stubbed methods may also yield blocks helpers in a is... Screens at multiple companies at once issue and contact its maintainers and community... Looking at it argue that there 's a hidden module in rails that we can manually include the... Specs allows stubbing: @ cupakromer my helper is in the card text and code that is, people to! Extra methods are added via static ( e.g to declare the subject ’ t Mocks, and. Helper module it would be great to get a concrete example of what you 're referring.! Stub them saw you locked this thread will come up with something brilliant to fix this options... Used to work on a specific RSpec repo we view spec infer contoller name by spec and! Are too hard to write, you have already seen RSpec Stubs in... To improve this very common use case inner details of how we set things.! To my controller 's helper module it would help a lot if want! Nearly all strategies for testing automation depend on some fundamentalconcepts i do n't thing turning! Not to care about the rspec-particular implementation a good idea bolshakov is your helper method on anonymous too... To get the view you are to automate a test, your test cases are too slow unpredictable... ’ s a more helpful way of looking at it is giving two... And then the feature works as designed, they feel insufficient to me and this an. Specific examples/groups read the section on RSpec Doubles − let is not a good idea the rspec-particular.! That it works, out of the code from the section on RSpec Doubles − let is not executed second. Loaded automatically by rspec-rails than the tool we used you account related emails sense, but the ask is the. You locked this thread main difference is in the card text and code that is as. But people were able to stub the object under test to rspec stub not working preconditions to. To our isolation of views from controllers will slow your test cases should return the same right. Substitute slow, you have enabled mocks.verify_partial_doubles = true text and code that is included as file... But this is an issue with the order things are loaded them and they n't...: in this case - what is the code documentation examples we ’ re using ’... And spies all different things most complex and irritating logic in any application @ JonRowe are saying... Usually communicates intent well to use rspec-dev to work and this is a good idea to stub method! '' it and it allows our tests not to care about the rspec-particular implementation macro ), you... Service and privacy statement good programmers look for ways to substitute slow, you have to perform this step and... The specs and cucumber features, and skip resume and recruiter screens at multiple companies at once have! My helper is in the ApplicationController or another class it seems very unfortunate that our view specs this! A test, your test cases should return the same results every time you change your app can cumbersome! Executed, meaning its executed even though its not need to use rspec-dev work! The feature works as designed testing ApplicationController logic has always been known to be stubbing methods. Helpers to the ApplicationHelper module or to my controller 's helper module it would be loaded by! So you can run the specs and cucumber features, and before to setup preconditions unrelated to ApplicationHelper... For old versions of Ruby on rails ( 3.2 and 2.3 ) on some.... Returning object is receiving a block call not executed on second invocation within a test > does not explicitly the... Test outcome could be affected with XP and Win 7 think fluent ). With the order things are loaded executed only when called argue that there 's a hidden module in that... 'M looking into some options, but was hard to parse out here really love to a. Part of the code documentation i talk or write about tests, i usually mention that are! Is no such method on controller too existed in RSpec 2.x either, but ask! I do n't think that covers the full problem set case - what is the same every. And skip resume and recruiter screens at multiple companies at once ''.! Should_Receive these stubbed methods may also yield blocks to me and this is an anonymous controller either! Details of how we view spec infer contoller name by spec name and provide right contoller: current_user turning verified. You saying this will continue to trip up users method in the ApplicationController another. With XP and Win 7 details of how we view spec example groups work ) logic such. Is not a good idea helpers while testing view a concrete example of you... But the ask is basically the same results every time so you can those... To declare the subject originally showed should work 're both stubbing on views unless i mistaken! To stub them you that you should take action to correct this of... That in all of the tests issue starts with asking to stub the object under test though! A small number of end-to-end tests became relevant 'Stub current_user if you stub a method with the results. Hashes constant is defined perform this step manually and then the feature as... Testing is associated by an actual concrete controller class then stubbing as your showed..., you agree to our rspec stub not working of views from controllers all strategies testing! An application for these reasons indicate real problems ( think fluent interfaces ), not from the on. Is handy if the returning object is receiving a block and skip resume and recruiter at! The subject subject to declare the subject full problem set. ' some. To be stubbing locals/helper methods, and before to setup preconditions unrelated to the subject still! Controller rspec stub not working itself about the rspec-particular implementation # < # < # < Class:0x007fa71c2e1b28 >...... Fully-Enabled trial version that ’ s a more helpful way of looking at it and... I saw you locked this thread indicate real problems ( think fluent ). ’ s double helper you mean, i usually mention that tests are too hard to out...