Create a gist now

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

Simple Breadcrumb Object with Tests
class Breadcrumb
Crumb =, :link)
attr_reader :crumbs
def initialize(name = "Home", link = "/")
@crumbs = []
self.add(name, link)
def add(name, link)
@crumbs <<,link)
------ and tests --------
describe Breadcrumb do
describe '#new' do
it 'sets default crumb of Home /' do
@breadcrumb =
@breadcrumb.should have(1).crumb == 'Home' == '/'
it 'sets initial crumb of Main /main' do
@breadcrumb ='Main', '/main')
@breadcrumb.should have(1).crumb == 'Main' == '/main'
describe '#add' do
it 'a second crumb' do
@breadcrumb =
@breadcrumb.add('Products', '/products')
@breadcrumb.should have(2).crumbs
output of spec doc
sets default crumb of Home /
sets initial crumb of Main /main
a second crumb

Small nit: I'd make the crumbs accessor a reader. add is the only thing that should mutate your crumb collection.


I, too, have a couple of nits, specifically style nits regarding the specs (the class under test looks legit to me):

  • I'd use a couple of inner describe blocks. The top two are about .new and the last is about .add. If you put a leading . or # in a describe call, RSpec will concat it to the name of the class under test without white space in the output.
  • After breaking them up into two groups like that, I'd probably just do away with the before and handle that in each test individually. If you had more examples that shared needed setup within my proposed describe blocks, I'd break them up with a context each and put the before in there.
  • You'll have to rejigger the strings you feed into it at this point if the output is to make any sense. Relatedly, I always try to avoid "should" and, instead, pass things like "adds a crumb" rather than "should add a crumb".

If you're interested, I wrote a blog post about some of my thinking behind the above points. Also, I'm happy to be disagreed with on this stuff; I'm still sorting out how to write maintainable specs, so I welcome an opportunity to learn how other folks think about it.


good point... I think i had it as reader initially but when i an error i change trying to figure out what was going on ... turned out i had def initializer instead of def initialize (doh) and didn't change it back!


Thanks Ben, good suggestions... I forgot about describe "#method.." i've used that before. Thanks again!!


hmm i stil not happy with the names of the tests for #new ...

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