Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@dandorman
Created August 9, 2011 23:00
Show Gist options
  • Star 18 You must be signed in to star a gist
  • Fork 4 You must be signed in to fork a gist
  • Save dandorman/1135434 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save dandorman/1135434 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
FactoryGirl vs. Fabrication
require 'spec_helper'
describe FeaturePool do
it "creates a new instance given valid attributes" do
Fabricate :feature_pool
end
it "is not valid without a name" do
Fabricate.build(:feature_pool, :name => "").should_not be_valid
end
describe "#current" do
it "returns the feature appearance whose position corresponds with #head" do
pool = Fabricate :populated_feature_pool
pool.current.featurable.user.name.should == "John Gruber"
end
it "has some feature appearances" do
pool = Fabricate :populated_feature_pool
pool.should have(5).feature_appearances
end
it "persists its appearances" do
Fabricate :populated_feature_pool, :name => "foo/bar"
pool = FeaturePool.find_by_name("foo/bar")
pool.should have(5).feature_appearances
end
end
end
Fabricator(:feature_pool) do
name "home/primary"
accepts "NewsArticle"
rotate_after 24
head 1
paused false
end
Fabricator(:populated_feature_pool, :from => :feature_pool) do
feature_appearances!(:count => 5) do |feature_pool, position|
Fabricate :feature_appearance, :feature_pool => feature_pool, :position => position
end
end
Fabricator(:feature_appearance) do
featurable! :fabricator => :news_article
position 1
end
Fabricator(:news_article) do
title "This Is the New Apple"
body "Superior products _and_ mainstream prices."
user!
end
Fabricator(:user) do
name "John Gruber"
email { sequence(:email) {|n| "user#{n}@example.com" } }
end
FactoryGirl.define do
factory :feature_pool do
name "home/primary"
accepts "NewsArticle"
rotate_after 24
head 1
paused false
factory :populated_feature_pool do
feature_appearances { FactoryGirl.build_list(:feature_appearance, 5) }
end
end
factory :feature_appearance do
association :featurable, :factory => :news_article
position 1
end
factory :news_article do
title "This Is the New Apple"
body "Superior products _and_ mainstream prices."
user
end
factory :user do
name "John Gruber"
sequence(:email) {|n| "user#{n}@example.com" }
end
end
require 'spec_helper'
describe FeaturePool do
it "creates a new instance given valid attributes" do
FactoryGirl.create(:feature_pool)
end
it "is not valid without a name" do
FactoryGirl.build(:feature_pool, :name => "").should_not be_valid
end
describe "#current" do
it "returns the feature appearance whose position corresponds with #head" do
pool = FactoryGirl.create(:populated_feature_pool)
pool.current.featurable.user.name.should == "John Gruber"
end
it "has some feature appearances" do
pool = FactoryGirl.create(:populated_feature_pool)
pool.should have(5).feature_appearances
end
it "persists its appearances" do
FactoryGirl.create(:populated_feature_pool, :name => "foo/bar")
pool = FeaturePool.find_by_name("foo/bar")
pool.should have(5).feature_appearances
end
end
end
@NARKOZ
Copy link

NARKOZ commented Aug 13, 2012

You can include FactoryGirl::Syntax::Methods and stop typing FactoryGirl.

@monomadic
Copy link

These examples display pretty bad practices unfortunately - you should never build up complex structure in your factories or fabrications. It gives them the same downsides as fixtures. Structure should always be built up within the test itself.

Having complex structure in factory objects to DRY your tests obscures the object structure, adds unnecessary associations for tests that don't use them, and creates problems when you need a test which changes one small association or value, and all your other tests fail. It's an example of bad DRY.

Sucks that people keep persisting it. The line:

pool.should have(5).feature_appearances

...for example, means that your test is now tied to 5 associated objects within EVERY feature pool factory by default - unseen by the test itself. All tests that don't need any feature appearances, create them anyway. Then you start building tests assuming the value will be five, overriding if not - suddenly most of your tests are overwriting the default, somebody changes it, and your tests are breaking because of a value far outside the test itself.

Obviously this is an overly simplified example that is easy to fix, but start multiplying the assumptions you're making about the structure of your data, with other associations and sub-objects, and soon your tests are unmaintainable soup.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment