Created
October 26, 2012 16:34
-
-
Save ticktricktrack/3959775 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
APIMatchers example specs
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
### Gemfile | |
source 'https://rubygems.org' | |
gem 'rspec', '2.11.0' | |
gem 'api_matchers', '0.1.1' | |
### spec | |
require 'api_matchers' | |
include APIMatchers::RSpecMatchers | |
describe "APIMatcher examples" do | |
it "shouldn't fail" do | |
"{ 'transaction': { 'id': '54', 'status': 'paid' } }".should have_node(:transaction) | |
end | |
it "also shouldn't fail" do | |
"{ 'transaction': { 'id': '54', 'status': 'paid' } }".should have_node(:id).with(54) | |
end | |
it "passes" do | |
'{"error": "Transaction error: Name cant be blank"}'.should have_node(:error).including_text("Transaction error") | |
end | |
it "passes too" do | |
'{"creditcard":true}'.should have_node(:creditcard).with(true) | |
end | |
end | |
### | |
rspec api_matchers_spec.rb | |
FF.. | |
Failures: | |
1) APIMatcher examples shouldn't fail | |
Failure/Error: "{ 'transaction': { 'id': '54', 'status': 'paid' } }".should have_node(:transaction) | |
expected to have node called: 'transaction'. Got: '{ 'transaction': { 'id': '54', 'status': 'paid' } }' | |
# ./api_matchers_spec.rb:6:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>' | |
2) APIMatcher examples also shouldn't fail | |
Failure/Error: "{ 'transaction': { 'id': '54', 'status': 'paid' } }".should have_node(:id).with(54) | |
expected to have node called: 'id' with value: '54'. Got: '{ 'transaction': { 'id': '54', 'status': 'paid' } }' | |
# ./api_matchers_spec.rb:10:in `block (2 levels) in <top (required)>' | |
Finished in 0.00822 seconds | |
4 examples, 2 failures | |
Failed examples: | |
rspec ./api_matchers_spec.rb:5 # APIMatcher examples shouldn't fail | |
rspec ./api_matchers_spec.rb:9 # APIMatcher examples also shouldn't fail |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment