Re-using specs from ad2-getting-started #8
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At a glance these look good to me!
A better way might be actually testing for the presence of the helper methods in the source code, rather than just testing the HTML output. But I'm not sure how/if we want to do that.
TIL you can write view specs. You might have access to the pre-rendered template so that might be the ideal way to test if someone used a helper method.
spec/features/1_basic_spec.rb
Outdated
| it "has a hidden authenticity token input", points: 2 do | ||
| expect(page).to have_selector("input[name='authenticity_token']", visible: false), | ||
| "Expected the new movie form to have an input field of type='hidden' and name='authenticity_token'." | ||
| end |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Testing this again using the "solutions" from helper-methods-3, I don't think this tag is visible from the form_with method.
This always seems to fail for me, even when enabling JavaScript in the test (in case the input is injected later on)
Did this pass for you when the form used form_with?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jelaniwoods See my comment about this on the other PR. I know it's weird, but it's actually kind of a good thing that this test doesn't pass with form_with here. We want them to write it out by hand and in the next project helper-methods-3 they get to use form_with and we drop the authenticity token test.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bpurinton I thought the ending point of helper-methods is the starting point for helper-methods-3, which uses form_with. The current README for this project says to use form_with. Is the idea for this assignment that they also include the authenticity_token helper even though it shouldn't be required?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jelaniwoods Ah, you're right. The video recording for this project starts with the form_with refactoring. Removing this spec here then.
I experimented with this but the Can't figure this out! Maybe better to just merge these basic specs and turn my list of additional specs above into an issue, and then eventually separate PRs. |
@bpurinton If there isn't a built in helper, you could also open and read the template directly, since we're assuming that their view templates are named conventionally. Something like: require "rails_helper"
describe "movies/index" do
it "uses an embedded Ruby link_to helper method", points: 2 do
template_name = "movies/index.html.erb"
template_path = Rails.root.join('app', 'views', template_name)
template_contents = open(template_path).read
expect(template_contents).to match /<%= link_to "Show details", movie %>/
end
endIt's unconventional, but functional. |
|
@jelaniwoods I do like your clever test strategy for helper methods, but let me put that idea on a separate PR with these "advanced" or "unconventional" tests and I can see about working on those later / after discussing with Raghu. Merging these ones for now! |
This first helper methods project is just a re-factoring, so all of the tests pass and the goal is just to not "break" anything and have the tests keep passing in the end.
A better way might be actually testing for the presence of the helper methods in the source code, rather than just testing the HTML output. But I'm not sure how/if we want to do that.
Things to potentially test for here (in the future off separate PRs):
link_toform_withinnew.html.erbandedit.html.erbfindin controllerquery_from form params and change from strings to symbolsresourcesinroutes.rb