blowmage/minitest-rails

Minitest integration for Rails

Mike Moore

@blowmage

You can also weigh in on how to support controller tests on blowmage/minitest-rails#194

Edgar Ortega

@EdgarOrtegaRamirez

@blowmage thanks, I used this patch and it's working right now.

Mike Simkins

@msimkins

Can you stop generating controller tests in Rails 4

Mike Moore

@blowmage

Rails doesn't have an option to do that AFAIK

Mike Simkins

@msimkins

I am trying to switch to mini from RSpec, and there you can pass an option controller_specs: false, and it does not generate them, I was hoping I missed the option in Minitest

Mike Moore

@blowmage

No, we stick to the rails defaults as much as possible.

Mike Simkins

@msimkins

Thanks @blowmage, I thought that was the case, I thought with the comments about controller tests being deprecated in Rails5, that it may have been something I could do, Ill just delete the folder, as for some strange reason I can't make the authentication work right, but it works fine as an integration test <sigh>

Mike Moore

@blowmage

ActionController::TestCase is being deprecated, but controller tests remain. they will just use ActionDispatch::IntegrationTest now

Anton Trapp

@AntonTrapp

Thanks @blowmage - just joined this room and already the first useful information in the first entry :)

Mike Moore

@blowmage

👍

Sebastián

@sebastian-palma

Hi guys, I'm having a doubt using Minitest and Rails 5, when I try to test for a 404 response and I get a 200.
The differences is when I try with get /users/z which responds with 404, but when I do it with get users_path, params: { id: 'z' } I have a 200 response.

Mike Moore

@blowmage

¯(ツ)/¯

Chris M

@CheezItMan

Just curious is there a way for Minitest-Rails to default to spec style tests on new rails apps

Mike Moore

@blowmage

there is a bug in minitest-rails-capybara. it should generate spec style tests by default, but its flipped. you can try configuring it in application.config.yaml

config.generators do |g|
g.test_framework :minitest, spec: true
end

Mike Moore

@blowmage

pushed 3.0.1 to fix the bug

Chris M

@CheezItMan

Thanks Mike, I'm not using capybara yet, but it still seems to generate:

class PostTest < ActiveSupport::TestCase
  # test "the truth" do
  #   assert true
  # end
end

Oleksandr T.

@a-tarasyuk

Minitest::Spec has let(:test) { } - is it the same as

def test
end

in Minitest::Unit?

Mike Moore

@blowmage

yes

Oleksandr T.

@a-tarasyuk

@blowmage thanks )

Nicholas

@nicholasshirley

Hi, I'm trying to test the deletion of an image associated with a user profile with Paperclip that is liked to an S3 bucket. I don't actually want the test to hit S3 though, is there a way to do this in Minitest?

Here is a SO post with the code that I've tried http://stackoverflow.com/questions/43760246/minitest-test-for-removing-paperclip-image-linked-to-s3-without-actually-upload

Mike Moore

@blowmage

Delegate the responsibility to hit S3 to something that your app owns, and then mock the call to it. If paperclip makes that too difficult, you can mock a call inside of paperclip, or try mocking the HTTP request.

Punita Ojha

@punitaojha

This message was deleted

Tessy Joseph John

@tessie

Hi I am getting : undefined method `get' in my test controller class

can some one help me

Mike Moore

@blowmage

That usually means it isn't recognized as a controller test

Tessy Joseph John

@tessie

oh.thanks

Tessy Joseph John

@tessie

That got fixed thanks @blowmage

Pete Doherty

@ethagnawl

Hello, all. Is it possible to disable the generation of controller tests via config? (e.g. config.generators/test_framework in config/application.rb) Minitest-rails appears to ignore my controller_specs false declaration.

Mike Moore

@blowmage

It is possible, but not something implemented yet

Would you like to add that?

Pete Doherty

@ethagnawl

ah, okay.

i'd be happy to take a look at implementing it. :)

Armin

@wuarmin

Hello, I have a basic minitest question: what's the minitest way of rspec's instance_double?

I have to mock, or stub external objects, but the problem is, that interface changes in the mocked objects won't attract attention. The tests pass, but the real implementation fails.

Mike Moore

@blowmage

minitest is designed intentionally to have very rudimentary implementations of mocks and stubs. see "Classical and Mockist Testing" here:

https://martinfowler.com/articles/mocksArentStubs.html

so you aren't going to get sophisticated implementations like rspec's instance_double in vanilla minitest. but you can use other mocking libraries like Mocha or even RSpec Mocks in minitest

i am a fan of rr myself

https://github.com/rr/rr

Armin

@wuarmin

Hey, thank you for the great information. Now I'm playing with rr:

    stub.proxy(MyClass).new(campaigns_id: 1, user: user) do |obj|
      # obj.respond_to?(:call).must_equal true # I need to call respond_to?, because otherwise test would pass, even if real MyClass-instances call method was renamed, removed, ...
      stub(obj).call { i_result }
    end

Armin

@wuarmin

Is there a way to achieve my goals?

@blowmage Thank You

Mike Moore

@blowmage

If your goal is to use rspec's instance_double with minitest, then I would use rspec-mocks:

https://relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/docs/outside-rspec/integrate-with-minitest

Armin

@wuarmin

thank you @blowmage , but can you tell me why people should use double's without checking if they respond like their real correspondents?

The idea of having passing tests, but failing implementations because of test-doubles appears not really calming.

Mike Moore

@blowmage

I am not a mockist, so I can't defend that approach. What you are describing is why I avoid mocks as much as possible. It is a false positive. I prefer to test my implementation as much as possible. I am more of a classicalist tester. Bottom up instead of outside in.

Armin

@wuarmin

Ok, that sounds reasonable :smile: . I am of your opinion

Martin Streicher

@martinstreicher

Where communities thrive

People

Repo info

Activity