I have googled this question but still not clear. I get that (:let) is lazily evaluated and will never be instantiated if you don't call it, while (:let!) is forcefully evaluated before each method call.
let(:article) = { Article.new(name: 'article1') }
let!(:article) = { Article.new(name: 'article1') }
Can any body explain it more and what are the benefits of using let!
Sometimes you want the indirect results of the let to be present.
For example...
let(:article) = { Article.create(name: 'article1' }
it "does not add an article with a duplicate name" do
expect(Article.create(name: article.name)).not_to change(Article.count)
end
This would actually fail, because the Article.count before the test will not include the article object because it's not yet created, not until it's referenced. So even though the new article (the one with the duplicate name) is not created, the test will still detect a change to Article.count
Now, if you do...
let!(:article) = { Article.create(name: 'article1' }
it "does not add an article with a duplicate name" do
expect(Article.create(name: article.name)).not_to change(Article.count)
end
The article object will already exist in the Article.count before the expect and the test will pass.
Related
I want to return true/false from a Vue method depending on user role check inside v-for and the method is not returning from if statement.
First, template is like this (simplified)
<div v-for="user in users" :key="user.id">
<div :contenteditable="checkuser(user)">{{content}}</div>
</div>
I just need true/false and this is the checkMethod
This doesn't work
checkUser(user) {
if (user.admin) {
return user.team_id === this.$store.state.user.team_id;
// I would expect to return from method here and not continue execution
// also, any variables (even declared outside if) are not modified
}
if (user.deleg) {
return user.subteam_id === this.$store.state.user.subteam_id;
}
// method ends here
}
I know this is stupid and simple but I cant get it working. If there is only one check it works ok obviously but I want to check it for 2 roles. Admin has also deleg permission so if user is admin it doesnt need to check for deleg, but if he doesnt have admin it should check for deleg.
#skirtle, thank you, you just did something to my brain with the confusion of invocations. It was entirely my thinking fail.
Solved code below
checkUser(user) {
if (this.$store.getters.isAdmin) {
return true;
}
if (this.$store.getters.isDeleg) {
return user.subteam_id === this.$store.state.user.subteam_id;
}
}
Explanation
I was checking for the passed user.admin from v-for, but I needed to check for user.admin of currently logged in user (if he can edit the content, then bind that attribute to true/false). As I have this already in vuex I just grabbed it with getter and returned true (working as you said).
I hope it makes sense. Thanks once again, I was stuck and you helped me.
#Jacob, I am just binding contenteditable to true/false with this function.
I have created rspec tests for my scopes (scope1, scope2 and scope3) and they pass as expected but I would also like to add some tests for a class method that I have which is what is actually called from my controller (the controller calls the scopes indirectly via this class method):
def self.my_class_method(arg1, arg2)
scoped = self.all
if arg1.present?
scoped = scoped.scope1(arg1)
end
if arg2.present?
scoped = scoped.scope2(arg2)
elsif arg1.present?
scoped = scoped.scope3(arg1)
end
scoped
end
It seems a bit redundant to run the same scope tests for each scenario in this class method when I know they already pass so I assume I really only need to ensure that different scopes are called/applied dependant on the args being passed into this class method.
Can someone advise on what this rspec test would look like.
I thought it might be something along the lines of
expect_any_instance_of(MyModel.my_class_method(arg1, nil)).to receive(:scope1).with(arg1, nil)
but that doesn't work.
I would also appreciate confirmation that this is all that's necessary to test in this situation when I've already tested the scopes anyway would be reassurring.
The Rspec code you wrote is really testing the internal implementation of your method. You should test that the method returns what you want it to return given the arguments, not that it does it in a certain way. That way, your tests will be less brittle. For example if you change what scope1 is called, you won't have to rewrite your my_class_method tests.
I would do that by creating a number of instances of the class and then call the method with various arguments and check that the results are what you expect.
I don't know what scope1 and scope2 do, so I made an example where the arguments are a name attribute for you model and the scope methods simply retrieve all models except those with that name. Obviously, whatever your real arguments and scope methods do you should put that in your tests, and you should modify the expected results accordingly.
I used the to_ary method for the expected results since the self.all call actually returns an ActiveRecord association and therefore wouldn't otherwise match the expected array. You could probably use includes and does_not_includes instead of eq, but perhaps you care about the order or something.
describe MyModel do
describe ".my_class_method" do
# Could be helpful to use FactoryGirl here
# Also note the bang (!) version of let
let!(:my_model_1) { MyModel.create(name: "alex") }
let!(:my_model_2) { MyModel.create(name: "bob") }
let!(:my_model_3) { MyModel.create(name: "chris") }
context "with nil arguments" do
let(:arg1) { nil }
let(:arg2) { nil }
it "returns all" do
expected = [my_model_1, my_model_2, my_model_3]
expect_my_class_method_to_return expected
end
end
context "with a first argument equal to a model's name" do
let(:arg1) { my_model_1.name }
let(:arg2) { nil }
it "returns all except models with name matching the argument" do
expected = [my_model_2, my_model_3]
expect_my_class_method_to_return expected
end
context "with a second argument equal to another model's name" do
let(:arg1) { my_model_1.name }
let(:arg2) { my_model_2.name }
it "returns all except models with name matching either argument" do
expected = [my_model_3]
expect_my_class_method_to_return expected
end
end
end
end
private
def expect_my_class_method_to_return(expected)
actual = described_class.my_class_method(arg1, arg2).to_ary
expect(actual).to eq expected
end
end
I'm trying to fix the following VBA statement (converting some old code just for fun and to learn Roslyn, not at all looking for anything perfect) to remove the Set keyword so it's a valid VB.NET statement:
Set f = New Foo()
When I look at it through the Syntax Visualizer, I see it turns into trailing trivia.
I'm trying to figure out how to find it using a query. I tried several approaches but all of the following came up empty:
var attempt1 = root.DescendantTokens().Where(t=>t.IsKind(SyntaxKind.SkippedTokensTrivia));
var attempt2 = root.DescendantTokens().Where(t => t.IsKind(SyntaxKind.SetKeyword));
var attempt3 = root.DescendantTrivia().Where(t => t.IsKind(SyntaxKind.SetKeyword));
var attempt4 = root.DescendantNodes()
.OfType<EmptyStatementSyntax>()
.Where(e => e.DescendantTokens().Any(t => t.IsKeyword()));
(Yes, I'm using C# to work with a VisualBasicSyntaxTree)
I can't seem to just find the SetKeyword token that appears in the visualizer, so I thought maybe it's doing some more heavy lifting to piece together what it really is (is that what's meant by structured trivia?). I read something in the documentation that mentioned the compiler can choose to represent it a couple of different ways, so I thought that may be what's going on here.
The query was just the first thing I tried, but in reality I have a SyntaxRewriter I'm using to visit the code to find and fix all such problems (I'm already able to fix missing parentheses around ArgumentLists, for example) but in this case I can't seem to figure out which Visit method to override.
So again, 1) how to query for these from the root and 2) the best override to select from a rewriter. I've been beating my face on the keyboard for two days on this which exponentially increases the likelihood that I'm having a cranio/recto-insertion moment and I need one of you kind souls to pull me out of it.
Cheers!
Brian
Edit: Fixed typo in query attempt1
So it appears that when the compiler reaches an error condition, it will skip all tokens up to the next point where it can recover and continue parsing (the end of the line in this case). The node representing this error condition is an EmptyStatement with trailing syntax trivia containing the rest of the text as parsed tokens.
So if you're going to rewrite a node, you'll want to rewrite EmptyStatements. But you don't want to write just any empty statement, just the ones with the "BC30807" diagnostic code.
public override SyntaxNode VisitEmptyStatement(EmptyStatementSyntax node)
{
var diagnostic = GetLetSetDiagnostic(node);
if (diagnostic == null)
return base.VisitEmptyStatement(node);
return RewriteLetSetStatement(node);
}
private Diagnostic GetLetSetDiagnostic(EmptyStatementSyntax node)
{
//'Let' and 'Set' assignment statements are no longer supported.
const string code = "BC30807";
return node.GetDiagnostics().SingleOrDefault(n => n.Id == code);
}
The implementation of the RewriteLetSetStatement() method is a bit of a mystery to me, I'm not sure how it can be implemented utilizing the compiler services effectively, I don't think that this is a use case that it covers well. The trivia retains the parsed tokens, but there's not much you can do with those tokens AFAIK.
Ideally, we'd just want to ignore the Set token from the tokens and throw it back into the parser to be reparsed. And as far as I can tell, that's not possible, we can only parse from text.
So, I guess the next best thing to do would be to take the text, rewrite it to remove the Set and parse the text again.
private SyntaxNode RewriteLetSetStatement(EmptyStatementSyntax node)
{
var letSetTokens = node.GetTrailingTrivia()
.Where(triv => triv.IsKind(SyntaxKind.SkippedTokensTrivia))
.SelectMany(triv => triv.GetStructure().ChildTokens())
.TakeWhile(tok => new[] {SyntaxKind.LetKeyword, SyntaxKind.SetKeyword}
.Contains(tok.VisualBasicKind()));
var span = new RelativeTextSpan(node.FullSpan);
var newText = node.GetText().WithChanges(
// replacement spans must be relative to the text
letSetTokens.Select(tok => new TextChange(span.GetSpan(tok.Span), ""))
);
return SyntaxFactory.ParseExecutableStatement(newText.ToString());
}
private class RelativeTextSpan(private TextSpan span)
{
public TextSpan GetSpan(TextSpan token)
{
return new TextSpan(token.Start - span.Start, token.Length);
}
}
I want to place some helper functions in another file, since they will be overly reused. I took the Computer-Databse sample's listing file:
https://github.com/playframework/Play20/blob/master/samples/scala/computer-database/app/views/list.scala.html
I created a new file, called "listing.scala.html" under the app/views package, and moved the #link function from the original file to it. This new file looks like this:
#(currentSortBy: String, currentOrder: String, currentFilter: String)
#****************************************
* Helper generating navigation links *
****************************************#
#link(newPage:Int, newSortBy:String) = #{
var sortBy = currentSortBy
var order = currentOrder
if(newSortBy != null) {
sortBy = newSortBy
if(currentSortBy == newSortBy) {
if(currentOrder == "asc") {
order = "desc"
} else {
order = "asc"
}
} else {
order = "asc"
}
}
// Generate the link
routes.Application.listPerfil(newPage, sortBy, order, currentFilter)
}
So, on my original file, I replaced the #link call, with this one:
#title
And the problem is, when I try to compile I get this error:
value link is not a member of play.api.templates.Html
But according to the documentation (http://www.playframework.org/documentation/2.0.4/ScalaTemplateUseCases) it seems to be ok.
Any guess?
Play's templates aren't the best place for placing advanced conditions, most probably you'll get better flexibility by processing it in some controller (or other method) which will return you only required link
ie.:
#title
In your case proposed link(...) function of Application controller can also return a reverse-route.
Keep in mind that including other templates is best option for repeating blocks of HTML but sometimes it's hard to get specified string (mainly because of not trimmed spaces). As you can see there is also problem with calling nested functions. Most probably you can generate whole A tag in the listing.scala.html however using it isn't comfortable enough (IMHO).
Is it possible to mock a stub/mock's object member call without having to define that as a stub, and also set the return value as all seperate verbose lines?
Example:
[TestMethod]
public void AssignedPermissions_AssociateExists_ReturnsEdit_Rhino()
{
//Arrange
var fakeConfiguration = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IDomainControllerConfiguration>();
var fakeAssociateRepository = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IAssociateRepository>();
fakeConfiguration.Stub(x => x.AssociateRepository).Return(fakeAssociateRepository);
fakeAssociateRepository.Stub(x=>x.GetAssociatesByRole(null,false,null)).IgnoreArguments()
.Return(new IAssociate[]{MockRepository.GenerateStub<IAssociate>()});
var domain = new DomainController(fakeConfiguration);
const AssignedPermission expected = AssignedPermission.Edit;
//Act
AssignedPermission actual = domain.AssignedPermissions();
//Assert
Assert.AreEqual(expected, actual);
}
Are all those temporary variables necessary just to stub out nested method calls?
I've never used the functionality, so I'm not 100% certain that this will work, but theoretically Rhino mocks supports "recursive mocking", which should allow you to at least cut out the fakeAssociateRepository by doing something like this:
var fakeConfiguration = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IDomainControllerConfiguration>();
fakeConfiguration.Stub(x => x.AssociateRepository.GetAssociatesByRole(null,false,null))
.IgnoreArguments()
.Return(new IAssociate[]{MockRepository.GenerateStub<IAssociate>()});
var domain = new DomainController(fakeConfiguration);
(note: code not tested, or even compiled)
Just wanted to share my input on this, since I just spent the last few hours wrestling with it. The answer posted above by Alconja absolutely works, but if you plan to use it for "AssertWasCalled" type of assertion, it does not assert the way I expected it to. It seems that the AssertWasCalled methods tried to assert the "get accessor" associated with the "nested" object.
For instance, if you wanted to do this:
fakeconfiguration.AssertWasCalled(x => x.AssociateRepository.GetAssociatesByRole(null, false, null));
You would get an exception such as
System.InvalidOperationException : Previous method 'IDomainControllerConfiguration.get_AssociateRepository();' requires a return value or an exception to throw.
Because the AssertWasCalled is asserting the get-accessor of the AssociateRepository property, rather than the GetAssociatesByRole() method. In the end, for my case I had to use the OP's methodology of creating mutliple stubs.