Comments on: Rails Testing Frequently Asked Questions — The Non-Code Version

By: Agile Ajax » ChicagoRuby meeting ‘Test Prescriptions’ recap » Pathfinder Development

Wed, 24 Jun 2009 18:52:48 +0000

[...] Rappin’s talk covered some of the most common questions he gets through the Pathfinder Development Blog, and his own site RailsPrescriptions site [...]

By: Dev Blog AF83 » Blog Archive » Veille technologique : Conditions d’utilisation, Lecture, HTML5, Mozilla, Vim, Git, Ruby, Rails, Javascript, Microframeworks, PHP, Python, Bases de données

Tue, 09 Jun 2009 11:03:01 +0000

[...] http://www.pathf.com/blogs/2009/05/rails-testing-frequently-asked-questions-the-non-code-version/ : une FAQ sur les tests dans Rails [...]

By: bryanl

bryanl — Fri, 22 May 2009 19:23:35 +0000

TATFT is thinking about testing all the time. Not actually doing it.

By: Dan Croak

Dan Croak — Wed, 20 May 2009 19:32:47 +0000

I like your suggested progression of testing tools. This is similar to how we teach testing in thoughtbot’s Rails training program.

* introduce Ruby
* introduce Four-Phase Test
* introduce Test::Unit
* unit test a Ruby class with Test::Unit
* Rails testing with Test::Unit
* as needs expand, introduce Shoulda & Factory Girl

In the advanced class, we get into mocking and different styles of testing (integration, isolation), and talk about RSPec’s separation of testing views & controllers as a reason you might then layer on RSpec on top of code you’ve already written. (Test::Unit & Shoulda code can run nicely inside RSpec)

I’ve found progression is important for Rails developers new to testing. There’s already a ton of information thrown at Rails developers, so building up piece-by-piece lowers the barrier to entry.

By: Takaaki Kato

Takaaki Kato — Sat, 16 May 2009 08:23:47 +0000

Thanks, Noel, for answering my questions at RubyLearning. Your effort on the book, I belive, will give people a better understanding and skillset about TDD.

By: Noel Rappin

Noel Rappin — Fri, 15 May 2009 22:07:42 +0000

@Chris, the test stack you list is pretty similar to the tools that I push for in the book (Machinist over Factory Girl, Mocha over the others for now, Shoulda over RSpec)…

By: Noel Rappin

Noel Rappin — Fri, 15 May 2009 22:06:45 +0000

@Derek It’s interesting that often when I write about TDD, somebody will mention the cult of Rails testing.

It’s interesting, because I’ve been doing TDD since about 2000, and had written xUnit style tests in at least six different programming languages before I even touched Rails. Okay, that sounds whiney, but the point still holds, my TDD advocacy only overlaps with my Rails advocacy in that Rails was designed to be a very friendly environment for testers.

By: Derek Neighbors

Derek Neighbors — Fri, 15 May 2009 21:12:57 +0000

I think we have to be careful to not start a “test for testing’s sake” movement. The cult of rails likes to rush to whatever kool aid du jour is being poured out, but sometimes kool aid can kill you.

To be clear, I am a huge proponent of TDD/BDD and think that code should be tested, but I also think unless you know why you are testing you should ask answer that question before continuing.

By: Chris Vincent

Chris Vincent — Fri, 15 May 2009 18:50:33 +0000

That’s a pretty good rundown. Excellent point about using tools because you need them, not just because they are the new hotness (not that it’s necessarily a bad idea to keep up with such things).

I recently wrote up a detailed breakdown of my own TDD setup with explanations of why I use what; maybe someone will find it useful:
http://code.isdangero.us/posts/My-test-driven-Ruby-setup

The post includes a subheading “TATFT?” wherein I question the notion of 100% test coverage. I think, as you put it, it’s really a question left for each developer or team to consider on a case-by-case basis. I think the line is still being drawn on this matter, and the true answer certainly won’t lie in overzealousness nor in a lack of testing altogether.