I want to write a few packaged plugins that I can pull into a project and configure for the specific project. For example, I may have a rolodex plugin in which i want the person's birthday to be configurable as required or not required.
in config/initializers/rolodex.rb
Rolodex::Application.config.require_birthday = true
Then in model Person.rb
class Person << ActiveRecord::Base
validates_presence_of :birthday, :if => Proc.new{ |p| Rolodex::Application.config.require_birthday}
...
a little bumpy for an approach maybe - if there's a more idiomatic way, holler.
but here's my question. i'm trying to write unit tests to verify that the config switch works. but i can't. if i write a unit test that sets ..require_birthday = false, it's too late, because the class has already been loaded and the validator defined based on the config values in the initializers. how am i supposed to test this?
it "should be strange"
Rolodex::Application.config.should_receive(:require_birthday=).with(true)
require Rails.root.join("config/initializers/rolodex")
end
Related
In Uncle Bob's clean architecture, which Hanami is inspired by, Form Objects guard the boundary between Interactors and our delivery mechanism (typically an http endpoint).
In the Hanami docs, bounary guarding is done using params blocks in Actions (see here). This seems to couple validation to the http delivery mechanism. It seems more natural to me that Form Objects (or params black which accomplish the same thing) would live in delivery-mechanism-agnostic Interactors.
Unfortunately, I cannot figure out if Hanami supports such a design. I found a similar question on the Hanami forum, but it has no answer.
To clarify, below is a snippet of code demonstrating the kind of thing I want to do, but using Virtus and ActiveModel::Validations rather than Hanami facilities. For those familiar with Trailblazer, its contract block within its operations (its term for Interactor) is another example.
Finally, am I misunderstanding something about the intended use of Hanami? Hanami supports Interactors, so it seems like this should be possible...
require 'hanami/model'
require 'active_model'
require 'virtus'
class PersonForm
include Virtus.model
include ActiveModel::Validations
attribute :name, String
attribute :age, Integer
validates :name, :age, presence: true
def each
attributes.each {|a| yield a}
end
end
class Person
include Hanami::Entity
attributes :name, :age
end
# Code like this would then live inside of an Interactor, which
# can accept a params hash.
jonah_form = PersonForm.new({name: 'Jonah', age: '99'})
jonah = Person.new(jonah_form) if jonah_form.valid?
p jonah #=> <Person:0x007fbdde1edcc0 #id=nil #name="Jonah" #age=99>
# do stuff with our jonah entity
sorry for missing this question.
The params act as validator to save developers to create and instantiate another class. In Ruby Community this is a problem.
DSL to the rescue for this compromise.
If you prefer to have a concrete form object, instead of using Virtus and ActiveModel, you can just include Hanami::Validations and have the same behavior.
I'm relatively new to testing and very new to Rails 4 and rSpec. I am trying to test a controller that uses Devise for authentication and I am stuck. All of the examples I can find are for Rails 3.
I'm using Rails 4.0.3, Devise 3.2.3, rSpec 2.14.1 and FactoryGirl 4.4.0.
class LessonPlansController < ApplicationController
before_action :authenticate_user!
# GET /lesson_plans
def index
#lesson_plans = current_user.lesson_plans.to_a
end
.
.
.
private
# Use callbacks to share common setup or constraints between actions.
def set_lesson_plan
#lesson_plan = LessonPlan.find(params[:id])
end
# Only allow a trusted parameter "white list" through.
def lesson_plan_params
params[:lesson_plan]
end
def lesson_plan_params
params.require(:lesson_plan).permit(:title, :synopsis)
end
end
Here are my factory definitions: (Maybe I don't need to define user_id in the lesson_plan factory?)
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :user do
sequence( :username ) { |n| "user#{n}" }
sequence( :email ) { |n| "foo#{n}#example.com" }
password 'foobarbaz'
password_confirmation 'foobarbaz'
created_at Time.now
updated_at Time.now
end
end
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :lesson_plan do
user_id 1
title "The French Revolution"
synopsis "Background and events leading up to the French Revolution"
end
end
And the test part is where I get stuck.
describe LessonPlansController do
let(:valid_attributes) { { } }
let(:valid_session) { {} }
# describe "GET index" do
it "assigns all lesson_plans as #lesson_plans" do
user=FactoryGirl.create(:user)
sign_in user
lesson_plan = LessonPlan.create! valid_attributes
get :index, {}, valid_session
assigns(:lesson_plans).should eq([lesson_plan])
end
end
I'm not sure what to put in valid_attributes and valid_session (or if I even need them). The test will get as far as signing in the user, but will fail on creation of the lesson_plan. Admittedly this is the default/generated test for rSpec, but I am not sure how to proceed.
Examples I have seen use a before block to set up the user. I haven't been able to find anything on the Devise wiki page covering how to write basic rSpec tests for a controller that requires the user to be logged in. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated!
"I'm not sure what to put in valid_attributes and valid_session (or if I even need them)."
Well that depends what you're testing for.. Say you're testing validations & want to ensure that a record not be created if x column is set to null... then you could try to specifically create a record with invalid attributes (e.g. column: nil) and expect the result to not return true; maybe you want to ensure that it IS created with valid attributes.
You can btw, use `attributes_for(:factory_name)`` since you're using FactoryGirl. And no you don't necessarily need to specify the user's id in your lesson plan factory; unless you always want it to reference user 1. You can simply reference user with no value. Check out http://everydayrails.com/2012/03/12/testing-series-intro.html and especially parts 3-5 for an introduction to testing with RSPec.. I found this a pretty easy to follow guide when I was getting started.
I am trying to learn Rspec in a very simple CRUD Rails 3.2.8 app. I'm following the general pattern of Michael Hartl's examples and have been moderately successful with cucumber for the outside in portion. Now I want to test a Twilio SMS feature and cannot seem to get to first base, mostly because I'm not asking the right questions, so I expect to be corrected here and get back on track.
My app has two models, commodity and price and they interact with each other in my cucumber tests, so it appears. I'm aware, like in cucumber, I need an object to start to test its interactions. In my prices controller, I see that I can get the commodity's prices with the below in my prices#create method:
#price = #commodity.prices.build(params[:price])
I ultimately want to generate a factory that will have many prices for a given commodity. But I want to get to base first. Following thoughtbot's examples on their Readme I'm attempting the following in rails console:
FactoryGirl.create(:commodity) do |price|
Commodity.prices.build(attributes_for(:price))
end
The result is: NoMethodError: undefined method `prices' for #
Hmm, I must not be understanding either Rspec or Factory Girl. Here is my basic factories.rb:
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :commodity do
name "corn"
end
sequence :price do |n|
price
date { Time.now }
end
end
Here are my two models:
class Commodity < ActiveRecord::Base
attr_accessible :description, :name
has_many :prices
end
MOST_RECENT = 5
class Price < ActiveRecord::Base
attr_accessible :buyer, :date, :price, :quality, :commodity_id
scope :most_recent, lambda { order("id desc").limit(MOST_RECENT) }
belongs_to :commodity
end
My attempt to understand this is to do it simply in Rails console but the error also appears when I run rspec as well. But why would FactoryGirl, or Rspec, not seem to use the prices method I get with Active Record? Clearly, I'm not understanding something or I would have found the answer on Stack, thanx, sam
In your FactoryGirl.create there are a couple problems. First, the block argument should be commodity, not price. create passes the created object into the block. Second, you're trying to run prices on the Commodity class. In your object relationship, prices is an accessor associated with a specific instance. There is no Commodity#prices method, but any given instance of Commodity will have prices. You can probably use build like that, but I think the canonical way is to use the shift operator to add a Price.
Putting this together gets you:
FactoryGirl.create(:commodity) do |commodity|
commodity.prices << FactoryGirl.create(:price, commodity: commodity)
end
I'm not sure what you're doing with the sequence in your Commodity factory definition. If you're trying to make sure that Commodities are created with Prices by default (without adding them as above), check out some of the tips at http://icelab.com.au/articles/factorygirl-and-has-many-associations/.
I am pretty sure I am missing a basic mistake here, so I am hoping another set of eyes might help. I am using Rails 3, Ruby 1.9.2 and Rspec 2.
I would like to define dynamic class methods on a model so that I can return base roles for an assignable object (such as account) as they are added to the system. For example:
BaseRole.creator_for_account
Everything works fine via the console:
ruby-1.9.2-p180 :003 > BaseRole.respond_to?(:creator_for_account)
=> true
but when I run my specs for any of class methods, I get a NoMethodError wherever I call the method in the spec. I am assuming that something about how I am dynamically declaring the methods is not jiving with RSpec but I cannot seem to figure out why.
The lib dir is autoloaded path and the methods return true for respond_to?.
# /lib/assignable_base_role.rb
module AssignableBaseRole
def self.included(base)
base.extend(ClassMethods)
end
module ClassMethods
BaseRole.all.each do |base_role|
role_type = RoleType.find(base_role.role_type_id)
assignable_name = base_role.assignable_type.downcase
method = "#{role_type.name}_for_#{assignable_name}"
define_method(method) do
self.where(:role_type_id => role_type.id,
:assignable_type => assignable_name).first
end
end
end
end
Then include the Module in BaseRole
# /models/base_role.rb
class BaseRole < ActiveRecord::Base
include AssignableBaseRole
belongs_to :role
belongs_to :role_type
......
......
end
Then in my spec:
it "adds correct authority for creator role" do
create_assignment
base_role = BaseRole.creator_for_account # <== NoMethodError here
user1 = Factory.create(:user)
account.users << user1
user1.roles_for_assignable(account).should include(base_role.role)
end
Did you have another class in your project or specs with the same name, but doesn't have the dynamic methods added? I had the exact same problem as you, and renaming one of the classes fixed it.
My guess is the other class is getting loaded first
It appears you are defining these methods based on values in the database:
BaseRole.all.each do |base_role|
.....
Could it be that "creator" doesn't exist in the test database as a role type, or "account" doesn't exist as assignable_type?
Presumably you are testing this in the console for development, not test, so the data could be mismatched. Might need to set up the data in a before hook.
I need to apply validation to a Model so that 2 integer values in the record, minimum and maximum, form an inclusive range (ex. 2 and 3 are ok, but 4 and 1 are not). From what I understand, since I need to validate 2 values against each other in the same record, I have to use ActiveModel::Validator (and not ActiveModel::EachValidator). So, I try the following:
Model (app/models/position.rb):
class Position < ActiveRecord::Base
validates_with InclusiveRangeValidator
end
Validator (app/lib/validators/inclusive_range_validator.rb):
class InclusiveRangeValidator < ActiveModel::Validator
def validate(record)
record.errors[:base] << "#{record.minimum} and #{record.maximum} do not form a valid inclusive range." unless record.minimum < record.maximum
end
end
I've read that Rails 3.0.5 doesn't automatically load the lib directory anymore, so I added this line in config/application.rb:
config.autoload_path += %W({config.root}/lib)
And then I reset the rails server so it'll take the change to config/application.rb. I run my unit tests, which tries to exercise the model to prove this validation works. I get this error:
uninitialized constant: Position::InclusiveRangeValidator (NameError)
What I think is happening is that Rails is not recognizing/finding my custom validator class, and so it assumes InclusiveRangeValidator is a constant in the class that it's referenced in. But, I thought the change I made to config/application.rb would put my validator in the load path so that it would be available.
I've gone through the other posts on StackOverflow and didn't come up with a solution, and I've read the API docs on validators, to no avail. I've got to be doing something simple and stupid, but I can't see what the issue is. Any help?
EDIT:
After more searching, I discovered that I don't need a custom validator at all, as I can accomplish the same goal with this:
validates :minimum, :numericality => {:greater_than_or_equal_to => 0 }
validates :maximum, :numericality => {:greater_than => :minimum }
However, the question still remains as to why Rails can't locate the custom validation class.
Once, I changed the line in application.rb to:
config.autoload_paths += %W[#{config.root}/lib/validators/]
Rails was able to find the right path to load my custom validator. I made the mistake of assuming Rails would automatically recurse the directory structure, this is evidently not the case.