如何使RSpec测试易于管理

Question

为了学习RoR，我开始使用优秀的Rails Tutorial。到目前为止一切顺利，尽管我注意到RSpec测试正在迅速变得混乱不堪。下面是sessions_controller.rb集成测试的示例。随着我的继续，它只会变得更长。

有没有一种合理的方法来将这些测试分成更小的块？你将如何去做?基于什么标准？我们非常欢迎这样的例子。

示例：

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: "wrong@example.com") }
      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

Answer 1

好吧，鉴于您已经将RSpec与shoulda一起使用(对吗？)，我认为您已经实现了很高级别的可读性和可管理性。您总是可以将此规范拆分为更小的部分，但您必须问自己，为一个控制器拆分测试代码真的有必要吗？你有很多describe部分，它们本身就很擅长结构化测试。如果任何东西失败了，RSpec总是会给你确切的行号，这样你就可以直接进入并修复它。

至于额外的可读性，我注意到您在describe部分之后使用了空行。有些人还喜欢在end语句前插入空行。我还建议您编写以end语句结尾的块，如下所示：

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

有了这样的部分结构，在许多编辑器中也有一个很好的特性，它允许通过隐藏代码并在describe之后显示end来缩小代码块内部。我相信你会自己解决这个问题的。我从来没有考虑过额外的可读性或基础知识之外的任何东西，我可以很好地管理我写的测试。

我希望这能让你确信你已经有了一个很好的方法来组织你的代码。我不认为拆分针对相同功能/对象/目标的测试仅仅为了将其控制在< 100行以下是有任何意义的。

更新

我最近读到了一篇article，其中DHH指出RSpec是不必要的复杂，并且test/unit是可读和易于维护的。我想你可能想知道这个。