specin rspec with rails
Posted by Tammer Saleh
Mar 09
Using rSpec / Spec::Rails
Installation is pretty simple, and is fully covered here.
Here’s an example of some reasonable specs for a product model:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 |
context "An instance of Product" do fixtures :products setup do @product = Product.find(:first) end specify "should return lowest of list_price or our_price when sent price" do @product.should_receive(:our_price).and_return(1) @product.should_receive(:list_price).and_return(2) @product.price.should == 1 end specify "should return highest of price or map_price when sent visible_price" do @product.should_receive(:map_price).and_return(1) @product.should_receive(:price).and_return(2) @product.visible_price.should == 2 end specify "should find love" do "shot down".should == "to be loved" end end |
This is just one context from the file. Here’s a screenshot of the output from the whole specification:

Note the delicate curves of colorization. Note the simplicity of the context/specification structure. Wonderful stuff, here.
Extending rSpec
Any good testing library needs to be easily extendable—adding assertions, custom test methods, and all kinds of helpers really eases the developer’s fingers. To that end, I ported some of my model test helpers to rSpec. Here’s how they’re used:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 |
context "The Product class" do model_class Product test_required_attributes :title, :sku test_unique_attributes :sku test_has_and_belongs_to_many :categories, :web_categories, :articles, :related_products, :accessories, :related_to_products test_has_many :alternate_images, :vendables, :synonyms, :metatags test_has_many :vendors, :through => :vendables test_has_one :image end |
And you can see the output in the screenshot above. Line 6 alone autogenerates six different specifications. This is very useful.
Unfortunately, getting this to work with rSpec is way more difficult than it should be. There are two root problems (as far as I can tell):
- The
contextmethod is defined on Kernel. This feels dirty, and means that any methods you’d like to add alongsidecontextalso have to be in Kernel. I don’t think it would have caused too much typing to have to wrap your contexts in a class. - The context of the
contextblock is an object instance, making it fairly difficult to wrap your head around exactly where you should be putting your extra code. The only source of information I could find about customizing rSpec suggests overridingbefore_context_eval. This would work for your own helpers, but not for third-party plugins (as they would override each other’s changes).
I finally got my plugin working while using the spec command, only to see it break everything horribly with the rake spec command (which seems to use a completely different Spec::Runner class). Not good, and giving up.
Final Opinions
Pros:
- I agree with the general philosophy of thinking in terms of behavior or specifications instead of thinking in terms of tests. This isn’t something intrinsic to rSpec, but it’s certainly encouraged by the syntax and output.
- Real sentences as your test names instead of
super_crappy_underscore_filled_ones. This is as it should be. - The ability to have your tests print themselves out as a list of specifications as you run them is super cool.
- Contexts rock. Both in keeping your tests DRY and in improving readability of your specification list. You could arguably remove fixtures altogether with judicious use of contexts.
- Auto-named tests seem like a fairly good idea, but I didn’t have time to play with them enough to say for sure.
- Built-in mocking/stubbing system (but see below)
- Ubiquity matters: if you’re going to bank on a new testing framework becoming the Rails standard, rSpec is probably it. (but see below)
Cons:
- As I said above, extending rSpec was a serious pain. It’s been my experience that the ability to write test libraries, encompassing paragraphs of code in a single sentence is the real key in improving test coverage and speeding up development time. This is easily my main gripe with rSpec, and I have high hopes that it will be eliminated as the library matures.
- I actually don’t like the
should/should_notsyntax. “3.should_not == 4” is pretty clear, but more complex assertions like “lambda { do something }.should_raise_error(Exception)” feel cumbersome compared to their Test::Unit counterparts: “assert_raises(Exception) { do something }”. This is a very personal and minor complaint. - rSpec is not a drop in replacement for the default
raketask. This means that any tools that expect the “86 tests, 329 assertions, 0 failures, 0 errors” line at the end of your tests (many CI servers, I’m sure) will be lost and confused. - rSpec comes with its own mocking system, which is great. Unfortunately, rumor on the internets is that it’s incompatible with mocha/stubba (my libraries of choice). Big deal? Not really.
- Ubiquity matters, and while rSpec is definitely the hot new upstart in town,
Test::Unitis still the ruling king, and had a good head start in terms of mindshare.
While I really like the work the rSpec team is doing, and I expect to see more improvements and cool features fairly soon, the issues above were enough to convince me that it’s just not yet ready for me to recommend to my coworkers. I’m open to debate or commentary, so if you think I’ve missed anything, just let me know.
Comments on this post
Mar 09
evan said,
Some of those into testing methodologies in my groups have moved to test/spec. For me it’s basically a wash. I write Test::Unit tests in a behavioral way (always have) and everything is fine.
Mar 09
Tammer Saleh said,
Evan: Thanks for the pointer.
I’m definitely looking at Test::Spec next, as well as Spec::Unit. If I go with the latter, I’m sure I’ll have to make some changes to get it to behave just the way we’d like.
Mar 10
Luis Lavena said,
Tammer:
I like how you DRYed your specs. I’ve been feeling a bit off “ruby way” since migrated from Test::Unit to rSpec.
Will try to reverse engineer your test_ methods ;-)
Thanks for this helpful post!
Mar 10
Tammer Saleh said,
Luis,
I didn’t want to clutter the article with the helpers I had written, but here they are: http://p.caboo.se/46045
You should be able to just add them into the spec_helper.rb file.
Two caveats: I stole a good deal of code from other snippets to make them and I intend to make these into a Test::Unit plugin of some sort
Sorry, comments are closed for this article.
© 2000 - 2009 by thoughtbot, inc.
written by a bushel of tiny robots
Come “ride the toad” on Hoptoad, the app error app.
Thunder Thimble: Brand monitoring for social media.
Widgetfinger: Simple content management for simple websites.
Tee-Bot, funny shirts your friends won't understand!
Umbrella Today: “It’s like totally the simplest weather report ever, Julie.”
Thoughtbot
thoughtbot is a technology consulting firm that provides web application development and design services. We focus on building modern systems, embracing good ideas and delivering elegant solutions.
Interested in learning Rails?
Sign up for our beginning or advanced training.
Archives