Add support for HBTM :join_table option
#556
Closed
Conversation
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
Closed
|
I (and I believe we, historically) have always tried to keep the matcher API on par with ActiveRecord's API. It seems that we should be able to keep the current |
|
I gotcha, @mcmire. I was having trouble coming up with a test for that scenario, but you've made it clear to me now. Also, looks like I missed a couple places where the old |
| @@ -54,7 +54,7 @@ | |||
| end | |||
| end | |||
|
|
|||
| describe '#join_table' do | |||
| describe '#join_table_name' do | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Prefer double-quoted strings unless you need single quotes to avoid extra backslashes for escaping.
|
@jacobsimeon Just checking in... did you understand what I was going after here and are you still working on this? |
|
@mcmire Sorry for the delay, I just got back from vacation. |
|
Okay no worries! |
added 4 commits
September 10, 2014 13:16
Free up the `join_table` name so that users can specify a `join_table` option when testing their associations.
Some developers might want to pass a :join_table option to their HABTM association declarations (e.g., `has_and_belongs_to_many :posts, join_table: :users_and_their_posts). Those same developers, may want to explicitly test the existence of the join table. Make this possible.
Rails supports declaring a `has_and_belongs_to_many` relationship with a custom `:join_table` option and some developers want to assert that the correct value is being used. Add `AssocationMatcher#join_table` to allow developers to test the following: 1) That the :join_table option is being used for the relationship 2) That the *correct value* is being used 3) That the custom join table exists in the database
jacobsimeon
force-pushed
the
hbtm-join-table-option
branch
from
ce865ce
to
d9cadb8
Compare
|
Ok, clearly I'm not using Appraisal correctly. Lemme see what I can do about that failing build. |
|
I understand that |
| @@ -732,6 +732,73 @@ def having_one_non_existent(model_name, assoc_name, options = {}) | |||
| end.to fail_with_message_including('missing columns: person_id, relative_id') | |||
| end | |||
|
|
|||
| context "declaring the association with a :join_table option" do | |||
|
|
|||
|
@jacobsimeon It looks |
|
I took care of fixing the errors and merged this as af85ac1. Thanks for the PR, cheers! |
netbsd-srcmastr
pushed a commit
to NetBSD/pkgsrc
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2018
# 3.1.2 ### Deprecations * This is the **last version** that supports Rails 4.0 and 4.1 and Ruby 2.0 and 2.1. ### Bug fixes * When the `permit` matcher was used without `#on`, the controller did not use `params#require`, the params object was duplicated, and the matcher did not recognize the `#permit` call inside the controller. This behavior happened because the matcher overwrote double registries with the same parameter hash whenever ActionController::Parameters was instantiated. * *Commit: [44c019]* * *Issue: [#899]* * *Pull request: [#902]* # 3.1.1 ### Bug fixes * Some matchers make use of ActiveSupport's `in?` method, but do not include the file where this is defined in ActiveSupport. This causes problems with projects using shoulda-matchers that do not include all of ActiveSupport by default. To fix this, replace `in?` with Ruby's builtin `include?`. * *Pull request: [#879]* * `validate_uniqueness_of` works by creating a record if it doesn't exist, and then testing against a new record with various attributes set that are equal to (or different than) corresponding attributes in the existing record. In 3.1.0 a change was made whereby when the uniqueness matcher is given a new record and creates an existing record out of it, it ensures that the record is valid before continuing on. This created a problem because if the subject, before it was saved, was empty and therefore in an invalid state, it could not effectively be saved. While ideally this should be enforced, doing so would be a backward-incompatible change, so this behavior has been rolled back. ([#880], [#884], [#885]) * *Commit: [45de869]* * *Issues: [#880], [#884], [#885]* * Fix an issue with `validate_uniqueness_of` + `scoped_to` when used against a model where the attribute has multiple uniqueness validations and each validation has a different set of scopes. In this case, a test written for the first validation (and its scopes) would pass, but tests for the other validations (and their scopes) would not, as the matcher only considered the first set of scopes as the *actual* set of scopes. * *Commit: [28bd9a1]* * *Issues: [#830]* ### Improvements * Update `validate_uniqueness_of` so that if an existing record fails to be created because a column is non-nullable and was not filled in, raise an ExistingRecordInvalid exception with details on how to fix the test. * *Commit: [78ccfc5]* [#879]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#879 [45de869]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@45de869 [#880]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#880 [#884]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#884 [#885]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#885 [78ccfc5]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@78ccfc5 [28bd9a1]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@28bd9a1 [#830]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#830 # 3.1.0 ### Bug fixes * Update `validate_numericality_of` so that submatchers are applied lazily instead of immediately. Previously, qualifiers were order-dependent, meaning that if you used `strict` before you used, say, `odd`, then `strict` wouldn't actually apply to `odd`. Now the order that you specify qualifiers doesn't matter. * *Source: [6c67a5e]* * Fix `allow_value` so that it does not raise an AttributeChangedValueError (formerly CouldNotSetAttributeError) when used against an attribute that is an enum in an ActiveRecord model. * *Source: [9e8603e]* * Add a `ignoring_interference_by_writer` qualifier to all matchers, not just `allow_value`. *This is enabled by default, which means that you should never get a CouldNotSetAttributeError again.* (You may get some more information if a test fails, however.) * *Source: [1189934], [5532f43]* * *Fixes: [#786], [#799], [#801], [#804], [#817], [#841], [#849], [#872], [#873], and [#874]* * Fix `validate_numericality_of` so that it does not blow up when used against a virtual attribute defined in an ActiveRecord model (that is, an attribute that is not present in the database but is defined using `attr_accessor`). * *Source: [#822]* * Update `validate_numericality_of` so that it no longer raises an IneffectiveTestError if used against a numeric column. * *Source: [5ed0362]* * *Fixes: [#832]* [6c67a5e]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@6c67a5e [9e8603e]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@9e8603e [1189934]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@1189934 [5532f43]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@5532f43 [#786]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#786 [#799]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#799 [#801]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#801 [#804]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#804 [#817]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#817 [#841]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#841 [#849]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#849 [#872]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#872 [#873]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#873 [#874]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#874 [#822]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#822 [5ed0362]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@5ed0362 [#832]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#832 ### Features * Add a new qualifier, `ignoring_case_sensitivity`, to `validate_uniqueness_of`. This provides a way to test uniqueness of an attribute whose case is normalized, either in a custom writer method for that attribute, or in a custom `before_validation` callback. * *Source: [#840]* * *Fixes: [#836]* [#840]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#840 [#836]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#836 ### Improvements * Improve failure messages and descriptions of all matchers across the board so that it is easier to understand what the matcher was doing when it failed. (You'll see a huge difference in the output of the numericality and uniqueness matchers in particular.) * Matchers now raise an error if any attributes that the matcher is attempting to set do not exist on the model. * *Source: [2962112]* * Update `validate_numericality_of` so that it doesn't always run all of the submatchers, but stops on the first one that fails. Since failure messages now contain information as to what value the matcher set on the attribute when it failed, this change guarantees that the correct value will be shown. * *Source: [8e24a6e]* * Continue to detect if attributes change incoming values, but now instead of immediately seeing a CouldNotSetAttributeError, you will only be informed about it if the test you've written fails. * *Source: [1189934]* * Add an additional check to `define_enum_for` to ensure that the column that underlies the enum attribute you're testing is an integer column. * *Source: [68dd70a]* * Add a test for `validate_numericality_of` so that it officially supports money columns. * *Source: [a559713]* * *Refs: [#841]* [2962112]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@2962112 [8e24a6e]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@8e24a6e [68dd70a]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@68dd70a [a559713]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@a559713 # 3.0.1 ### Bug fixes * Fix `validate_inclusion_of` + `in_array` when used against a date or datetime column/attribute so that it does not raise a CouldNotSetAttributeError. ([#783], [8fa97b4]) * Fix `validate_numericality_of` when used against a numeric column so that it no longer raises a CouldNotSetAttributeError if the matcher has been qualified in any way (`only_integer`, `greater_than`, `odd`, etc.). ([#784], [#812]) ### Improvements * `validate_uniqueness_of` now raises a NonCaseSwappableValueError if the value the matcher is using to test uniqueness cannot be case-swapped -- in other words, if it doesn't contain any alpha characters. When this is the case, the matcher cannot work effectively. ([#789], [ada9bd3]) [#783]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#783 [8fa97b4]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@8fa97b4 [#784]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#784 [#789]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#789 [ada9bd3]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@ada9bd3 [#812]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#812 # 3.0.0 ### Backward-incompatible changes * We've dropped support for Rails 3.x, Ruby 1.9.2, and Ruby 1.9.3, and RSpec 2. All of these have been end-of-lifed. ([a4045a1], [b7fe87a], [32c0e62]) * The gem no longer detects the test framework you're using or mixes itself into that framework automatically. [History][no-auto-integration-1] has [shown][no-auto-integration-2] that performing any kind of detection is prone to bugs and more complicated than it should be. Here are the updated instructions: * You no longer need to say `require: false` in your Gemfile; you can include the gem as normal. * You'll need to add the following somewhere in your `rails_helper` (for RSpec) or `test_helper` (for Minitest / Test::Unit): ``` ruby Shoulda::Matchers.configure do |config| config.integrate do |with| # Choose a test framework: with.test_framework :rspec with.test_framework :minitest with.test_framework :minitest_4 with.test_framework :test_unit # Choose one or more libraries: with.library :active_record with.library :active_model with.library :action_controller # Or, choose the following (which implies all of the above): with.library :rails end end ``` ([1900071]) * Previously, under RSpec, all of the matchers were mixed into all of the example groups. This created a problem because some gems, such as [active_model_serializers-matchers], provide matchers that share the same name as some of our own matchers. Now, matchers are only mixed into whichever example group they belong to: * ActiveModel and ActiveRecord matchers are available only in model example groups. * ActionController matchers are available only in controller example groups. * The `route` matcher is available only in routing example groups. ([af98a23], [8cf449b]) * There are two changes to `allow_value`: * The negative form of `allow_value` has been changed so that instead of asserting that any of the given values is an invalid value (allowing good values to pass through), assert that *all* values are invalid values (allowing good values not to pass through). This means that this test which formerly passed will now fail: ``` ruby expect(record).not_to allow_value('good value', *bad_values) ``` ([19ce8a6]) * `allow_value` now raises a CouldNotSetAttributeError if in setting the attribute, the value of the attribute from reading the attribute back is different from the one used to set it. This would happen if the writer method for that attribute has custom logic to ignore certain incoming values or change them in any way. Here are three examples we've seen: * You're attempting to assert that an attribute should not allow nil, yet the attribute's writer method contains a conditional to do nothing if the attribute is set to nil: ``` ruby class Foo include ActiveModel::Model attr_reader :bar def bar=(value) return if value.nil? @bar = value end end describe Foo do it do foo = Foo.new foo.bar = "baz" # This will raise a CouldNotSetAttributeError since `foo.bar` is now "123" expect(foo).not_to allow_value(nil).for(:bar) end end ``` * You're attempting to assert that an numeric attribute should not allow a string that contains non-numeric characters, yet the writer method for that attribute strips out non-numeric characters: ``` ruby class Foo include ActiveModel::Model attr_reader :bar def bar=(value) @bar = value.gsub(/\D+/, '') end end describe Foo do it do foo = Foo.new # This will raise a CouldNotSetAttributeError since `foo.bar` is now "123" expect(foo).not_to allow_value("abc123").for(:bar) end end ``` * You're passing a value to `allow_value` that the model typecasts into another value: ``` ruby describe Foo do # Assume that `attr` is a string # This will raise a CouldNotSetAttributeError since `attr` typecasts `[]` to `"[]"` it { should_not allow_value([]).for(:attr) } end ``` With all of these failing examples, why are we making this change? We want to guard you (as the developer) from writing a test that you think acts one way but actually acts a different way, as this could lead to a confusing false positive or negative. If you understand the problem and wish to override this behavior so that you do not get a CouldNotSetAttributeError, you can add the `ignoring_interference_by_writer` qualifier like so. Note that this will not always cause the test to pass. ``` ruby it { should_not allow_value([]).for(:attr).ignoring_interference_by_writer } ``` ([9d9dc4e]) * `validate_uniqueness_of` is now properly case-sensitive by default, to match the default behavior of the validation itself. This is a backward-incompatible change because this test which incorrectly passed before will now fail: ``` ruby class Product < ActiveRecord::Base validates_uniqueness_of :name, case_sensitive: false end describe Product do it { is_expected.to validate_uniqueness_of(:name) } end ``` ([57a1922]) * `ensure_inclusion_of`, `ensure_exclusion_of`, and `ensure_length_of` have been removed in favor of their `validate_*` counterparts. ([55c8d09]) * `set_the_flash` and `set_session` have been changed to more closely align with each other: * `set_the_flash` has been removed in favor of `set_flash`. ([801f2c7]) * `set_session('foo')` is no longer valid syntax, please use `set_session['foo']` instead. ([535fe05]) * `set_session['key'].to(nil)` will no longer pass when the key in question has not been set yet. ([535fe05]) * Change `set_flash` so that `set_flash[:foo].now` is no longer valid syntax. You'll want to use `set_flash.now[:foo]` instead. This was changed in order to more closely align with how `flash.now` works when used in a controller. ([#755], [#752]) * Change behavior of `validate_uniqueness_of` when the matcher is not qualified with any scopes, but your validation is. Previously the following test would pass when it now fails: ``` ruby class Post < ActiveRecord::Base validate :slug, uniqueness: { scope: :user_id } end describe Post do it { should validate_uniqueness_of(:slug) } end ``` ([6ac7b81]) [active_model_serializers-matchers]: https://github.com/adambarber/active_model_serializers-matchers [no-auto-integration-1]: freerange/mocha@049080c [no-auto-integration-2]: rr/rr#29 [1900071]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@1900071 [b7fe87a]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@b7fe87a [a4045a1]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@a4045a1 [57a1922]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@57a1922 [19ce8a6]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@19c38a6 [eaaa2d8]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@eaaa2d8 [55c8d09]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@55c8d09 [801f2c7]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@801f2c7 [535fe05]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@535fe05 [6ac7b81]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@6ac7b81 [#755]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#755 [#752]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#752 [9d9dc4e]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@9d9dc4e [32c0e62]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@32c0e62 [af98a23]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@af98a23 [8cf449b]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@8cf449b ### Bug fixes * So far the tests for the gem have been running against only SQLite. Now they run against PostgreSQL, too. As a result we were able to fix some Postgres-related bugs, specifically around `validate_uniqueness_of`: * When scoped to a UUID column that ends in an "f", the matcher is able to generate a proper "next" value without erroring. ([#402], [#587], [#662]) * Support scopes that are PostgreSQL array columns. Please note that this is only supported for Rails 4.2 and greater, as versions before this cannot handle array columns correctly, particularly in conjunction with the uniqueness validator. ([#554]) * Fix so that when scoped to a text column and the scope is set to nil before running it through the matcher, the matcher does not fail. ([#521], [#607]) * Fix `define_enum_for` so that it actually tests that the attribute is present in the list of defined enums, as you could fool it by merely defining a class method that was the pluralized version of the attribute name. In the same vein, passing a pluralized version of the attribute name to `define_enum_for` would erroneously pass, and now it fails. ([#641]) * Fix `permit` so that it does not break the functionality of ActionController::Parameters#require. ([#648], [#675]) * Fix `validate_uniqueness_of` + `scoped_to` so that it does not raise an error if a record exists where the scoped attribute is nil. ([#677]) * Fix `route` matcher so if your route includes a default `format`, you can specify this as a symbol or string. ([#693]) * Fix `validate_uniqueness_of` so that it allows you to test against scoped attributes that are boolean columns. ([#457], [#694]) * Fix failure message for `validate_numericality_of` as it sometimes didn't provide the reason for failure. ([#699]) * Fix `shoulda/matchers/independent` so that it can be required independently, without having to require all of the gem. ([#746], [e0a0200]) ### Features * Add `on` qualifier to `permit`. This allows you to make an assertion that a restriction was placed on a slice of the `params` hash and not the entire `params` hash. Although we don't require you to use this qualifier, we do recommend it, as it's a more precise check. ([#675]) * Add `strict` qualifier to `validate_numericality_of`. ([#620]) * Add `on` qualifier to `validate_numericality_of`. ([9748869]; h/t [#356], [#358]) * Add `join_table` qualifier to `have_and_belong_to_many`. ([#556]) * `allow_values` is now an alias for `allow_value`. This makes more sense when checking against multiple values: ``` ruby it { should allow_values('this', 'and', 'that') } ``` ([#692]) [9748869]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers@9748869 [#402]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#402 [#587]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#587 [#662]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#662 [#554]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#554 [#641]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#641 [#521]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#521 [#607]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#607 [#648]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#648 [#675]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#675 [#677]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#677 [#620]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#620 [#693]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#693 [#356]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#356 [#358]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#358 [#556]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#556 [#457]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#457 [#694]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#694 [#692]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#692 [#699]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#699 [#746]: thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers#746
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In reference to Issue #547.
After renaming the method and adding tests for both the acceptance and rejection cases, I realized that the
AssocationMatcherwas already aware of any custom:join_tableoption that might have been passed to the association declaration.So all I've done is add this method to
AssociationMatcher:This was enough to make the tests pass, although it kinda feels like lying to the user. I see a few options:
join_tablemethod toAssociationMatchersince it could potentially mislead users and the join table's existence will always be tested correctly.join_tablemethod since it adds parity with ActiveRecord's API and gives a signal to users (and their coworkers) that a custom join table is being used for the association.:join_tableoption, similar to what is already being done for the:foreign_keyoption.What do you think?