ruby-on-rails - 如何使RSpec测试易于管理

为了学习RoR，我开始使用出色的Rails Tutorial。到目前为止，到目前为止还不错，尽管我注意到RSpec测试正在迅速变得混乱。以下是sessions_controller.rb集成测试的示例。随着我的不断前进，它只会变得更长。

是否有逻辑方法将这些测试分成较小的块？您将如何处理？基于什么标准？例子是最受欢迎的。

例：

require 'spec_helper'

describe "AuthenticationPages" do
  subject { page }

  describe "signin" do
    before { visit signin_path }

    it { should have_selector('h1',  text: 'Sign in') }
    it { should have_selector('title', text: full_title('Sign in')) }

    describe "with invalid information" do
      before { click_button "Sign in" }

      it { should have_selector('title', text: full_title('Sign in')) }
      it { should have_selector('div.flash.error', text: 'Invalid') }
      it { should_not have_link('Profile', href: signout_path ) }
      it { should_not have_link('Settings', href: edit_user_path) }

      describe "after visiting another page" do
        before { click_link "Home" }
        it { should_not have_selector('div.flash.error') }
      end
    end

    describe "with valid information" do
      let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
      before do
        fill_in "Email",   with: user.email
        fill_in "Password",  with: user.password
        click_button "Sign in"
      end

      it { should have_selector('title', text: user.name) }
      it { should have_link('Profile', href: user_path(user)) }
      it { should have_link('Settings', href: edit_user_path(user)) }
      it { should have_link('Users', href: users_path) }
      it { should have_link('Sign out', href: signout_path) }

      it { should_not have_link('Sign in', href: signin_path) }

      describe "visiting the sign up page" do
        before { visit sign_up_path }
        it { should_not have_selector('h1', text: 'Sign Up') }
        it { should_not have_selector('title', text: full_title('Sign Up')) }
      end

      describe "submitting to the create action" do
        before { post users_path(user) }
        specify { response.should redirect_to(user_path(user)) }
      end

      describe "followed by signout" do
        before { click_link "Sign out" }
        it { should have_link('Sign in') }
      end
    end
  end

  describe "authorization" do

    describe "for non-signed-in users" do
      let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }

      describe "in the users controller" do

        describe "visiting the edit page" do
          before { visit edit_user_path(user) }
          it { should have_selector('title', text: 'Sign in') }
        end

        describe "submitting to the update action" do
          before { put user_path(user) }
          specify { response.should redirect_to(signin_path) }
        end
      end

      describe "visiting user index" do
        before { visit users_path }
        it { should have_selector('title', text: 'Sign in') }
      end

      describe "when attempting to visit a protected page" do
        before do
          visit edit_user_path(user)
          sign_in user
        end

        describe "after signing in" do
          it "should render the desired protected page" do
            page.should have_selector('title', text: 'Edit user')
          end

          describe "when signing in again" do
            before do
              visit signin_path
              sign_in user
            end

            it "should render the default (profile) page" do
              page.should have_selector('title', text: user.name)
            end
          end
        end
      end
    end

    describe "as wrong user" do
      let(:user)        { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
      let(:wrong_user)  { FactoryGirl.create(:user, email: "[e-mail]") }
      before            { sign_in user }

      describe "visiting users#edit page" do
        before { visit edit_user_path(wrong_user) }
        it { should have_selector('title', text: 'Sample App') }
      end

      describe "submitting a PUT request to the users#update action" do
        before { put user_path(wrong_user) }
        specify { response.should redirect_to(root_path) }
      end
    end

    describe "as non-admin user" do
      let(:user) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }
      let(:non_admin) { FactoryGirl.create(:user) }

      before { sign_in non_admin }

      describe "submitting a DELETE request to the Users#destroy action" do
        before { delete user_path(user) }
        specify { response.should redirect_to(root_path) }
      end
    end
  end
end

最佳答案

好吧，看到您已经将RSpec与Shoulda一起使用了（是吗？），我认为您已经实现了较高的可读性和可管理性。您总是可以将此规范拆分为较小的部分，但是您必须问自己，是否真的有必要将一个控制器的测试代码拆分？您有很多describe部分，它们很擅长于结构化测试。如果发生任何故障，RSpec始终会为您提供确切的行号，以便您可以直接跳进来进行修复。

至于额外的可读性，我注意到您在describe部分后使用空白行。有些人还喜欢在end语句之前插入空白行。我还建议编写以end语句结尾的块，如下所示：

describe "GET /posts" do
#[...]
end #     GET /posts

由于部分的结构是这样的，因此许多编辑器中都有一个很好的功能，它可以通过隐藏代码并在end之后显示describe来缩小块内的代码。相信您会自行整理。我从未考虑过额外的可读性或除基础之外的任何内容，并且我可以管理我编写的所有测试。

希望这可以说服您，您已经拥有了一种组织代码的好方法。我认为将针对相同功能/对象/目标的测试分开只是为了使其保持在< 100行左右是没有任何意义的。

更新资料

我最近读了一个article，其中DHH指出RSpec不必要地复杂，并且test/unit可读且易于维护。我以为你可能想知道这一点。