Object Daddy
Version 1.0.1 (April 8, 2012)
Authors: Rick Bradley, Yossef Mendelssohn, Jeremy Holland
Gem Maintainer: Jeremy Holland
Copyright: Copyright (c) 2007, Flawed Logic, OG Consulting, Rick Bradley, Yossef Mendelssohn
License: MIT License. See LICENSE.txt file for more details.
Object Daddy is a library (as well as a Ruby on Rails plugin) designed to assist in automating testing of large collections of objects, especially webs of ActiveRecord models. It is a descendent of the "Object Mother" pattern for creating objects for testing, and is related to the concept of an "object exemplar" or stereotype.
See http://b.logi.cx/2007/11/26/object-daddy for inspiration, historical drama, and too much reading.
Compatibility
Object Daddy does not require Rails/ActiveRecord in order to be of use, but should you be doing so, be aware that this gem is compatible only with Rails >= 3.0.0. It has been tested with the following versions, but should be perfectly compatible with all corresponding minor releases.
- Rails 3.0.12
- Rails 3.1.4
- Rails 3.2.3
Installation
Add the following to your Gemfile and run bundle install
group :development, :test do
gem 'object-daddy'
end
Once installed, to set up your exemplars directory, run rails g object-daddy
(if using with Rails)
Using Object Daddy
Object Daddy adds a .generate
method to every ActiveRecord model which can be
called to generate a valid instance object of that model class, for use in
testing:
it "should have a comment for every forum the user posts to" do
@user = User.generate
@post = Post.generate
@post.comments << Comment.generate
@user.should have(1).comments
end
This allows us to generate custom model objects without relying on fixtures, and without knowing, in our various widespread tests and specs, the details of creating a User, Post, Comment, etc. Not having to know this information means the information isn't coded into dozens (or hundreds) of tests, and won't need to be changed when the User (Post, Comment, ...) model is refactored later.
Object Daddy will identify associated classes that need to be instantiated to make the main model valid. E.g., given the following models:
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :login
validates :login, :presence => true
end
class Login < ActiveRecord::Base
has_one :user
end
A call to User.generate
will also make a call to Login.generate
so that
User#login
is present, and therefore valid.
If all models were able to be created in a valid form by the default Model.new call with no knowledge of the model itself, there'd be no need for Object Daddy. So, when we deal with models which have validity requirements, requiring fields which have format constraints, we need a means of expressing how to create those models -- how to satisfy those validity constraints.
Object Daddy provides a generator_for
method which allows the developer to
specify, for a specific model attribute, how to make a valid value. Note that
validates_uniqueness_of
can require that, even if we make 100,000 instances
of a model that unique attributes cannot have the same values.
Object Daddy's generator_for
method can take three main forms corresponding to
the means of finding a value for the associated attribute: a block, a method
call, or using a generator class.
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
validates :email,
:presence => true,
:uniqueness => true,
:format => {
:with => /^[-a-z_+0-9.]+@(?:[-a-z_+0-9.]\.)+[a-z]+$/i
}
validates :username,
:presence => true,
:format => {
:with => /^[a-z0-9_]{4,12}$/i
}
generator_for :email, :start => 'test@domain.com' do |prev|
user, domain = prev.split('@')
user.succ + '@' + domain
end
generator_for :username, :method => :next_user
generator_for :ssn, :class => SSNGenerator
def self.next_user
@last_username ||= 'testuser'
@last_username.succ
end
end
class SSNGenerator
def self.next
@last ||= '000-00-0000'
@last = ("%09d" % (@last.gsub('-', '').to_i + 1)).sub(/^(\d{3})(\d{2})(\d{4})$/, '\1-\2-\3')
end
end
Note that the block method of invocation (as used with :email above) takes an optional :start argument, to specify the value of that attribute on the first run. The block will be called thereafter with the previous value of the attribute and will generate the next attribute value to be used.
A simple default block is provided for any generator with a :start value.
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
generator_for :name, :start => 'Joe' do |prev|
prev.succ
end
generator_for :name, :start => 'Joe' # equivalent to the above
end
You can reset a class' generators to their initial value by calling:
User.reset_generators!
The :method form takes a symbol naming a class method in the model class to be called to generate a new value for the attribute in question. If the method takes a single argument, it will act much like the block method of invocation, being called with the previous value and generating the next.
The :class form calls the .next class method on the named class to generate a new value for the attribute in question.
The argument (previous value) to the block invocation form can be omitted if it's going to be ignored, and simple invocation forms are provided for literal values.
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
generator_for(:start_time) { Time.now }
generator_for :name, 'Joe'
generator_for :age => 25
end
The developer would then simply call User.generate
when testing.
If some attribute values are known (or are being controlled during testing)
then these can simply be passed in to .generate
:
@bad_login = Login.generate(:expiry => 1.week.ago)
@expired_user = User.generate(:login => @bad_login)
A .generate!
method is also provided. The generate/generate! pair of methods
can be thought of as analogs to create/create!, one merely providing an instance
that may or may not be valid and the other raising an exception if any
problem comes up.
Finally, a .spawn
method is provided that only gives a new, unsaved object. Note
that this is the only method of the three that is available if you happen to be
using Object Daddy outside of Rails.
Exemplars
In the examples given above we are using generator_for
in the bodies of the
models themselves. Given that Object Daddy is primarily geared towards
annotating models with information useful for testing, we anticipate that
generator_for
should not normally be included inline in models. Rather, we
will provide a place where model classes can be re-opened and generator_for
calls (and support methods) can be written without polluting the model files
with Object Daddy information.
when the Object Daddy generator is run, it will create RAILS_ROOT/spec/exemplars/ as a place to hold exemplar files for Rails model classes. (We are seeking perhaps some better terminology)
An exemplar for the User model would then be found in
RAILS_ROOT/spec/exemplars/user_exemplar.rb (when you are using a testing tool
which works from RAILS_ROOT/test, Object Daddy will create
RAILS_ROOT/test/exemplars and look for your exemplars in that directory
instead). Exemplar files are completely optional, and no model need have
exemplar files. The .generate
method will still exist and be callable, and
generator_for
can be declared in the model files themselves. If an exemplar
file is available when .generate
is called on a model, the exemplar file will
be loaded and used. An example user_exemplar.rb appears below:
require 'ssn_generator'
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
generator_for :email, :start => 'test@domain.com' do |prev|
user, domain = prev.split('@')
user.succ + '@' + domain
end
generator_for :username, :method => :next_user
generator_for :ssn, :class => SSNGenerator
def self.next_user
@last_username ||= 'testuser'
@last_username.succ
end
end
Blocks
The spawn
, generate
and generate!
methods can all accept a block, to which
they'll yield the generated object. This provides a nice scoping mechanism in
your code examples. Consider:
describe "admin user" do
it "should be authorized to create company profiles"
admin_user = User.generate!
admin_user.activate!
admin_user.add_role("admin")
admin_user.should be_authorized(:create, Company)
end
end
This could be refactored to:
describe "admin user" do
it "should be authorized to create company profiles" do
admin_user = User.generate! do |user|
user.activate!
user.add_role("admin")
end
admin_user.should be_authorized(:create, Company)
end
end
Or:
describe "admin user" do
it "should be authorized to create company profiles"
User.generate! do |user|
user.activate!
user.add_role("admin")
end.should be_authorized(:create, Company)
end
end
Or even:
describe "admin user" do
def admin_user
@admin_user ||= User.generate! do |user|
user.activate!
user.add_role("admin")
end
end
it "should be authorized to create company profiles"
admin_user.should be_authorized(:create, Company)
end
end
This last refactoring allows you to reuse the admin_user method across multiple code examples, balancing DRY with local data.
Object Daddy and Fixtures
While Object Daddy is meant to obviate the hellish devilspawn that are test fixtures, Object Daddy should work alongside fixtures just fine. To each his own, I suppose.
Known Issues
The simple invocation forms for generator_for
when using literal values do not
work if the literal value is a Hash. Don't do that.
class User < ActiveRecord::Base
generator_for :thing_hash, { 'some key' => 'some value' }
generator_for :other_hash => { 'other key' => 'other value' }
end
I'm not sure why this would even ever come up, but seriously, don't.
Required belongs_to
associations are automatically generated when generating an instance,
but only if necessary.
class Category < ActiveRecord::Base
has_many :items
end
class Item < ActiveRecord::Base
belongs_to :category
validates :category, :presence => true
end
Item.generate
will generate a new category, but some_category.items.generate
will not.
Unless, of course, you are foolish enough to define a generator in the exemplar.
class Item
generator_for(:category) { Category.generate }
end
Once again, don't do that.
Rails surprises
Due to the way Rails handles associations, cascading generations (as a result of
required associations) are always generated-and-saved, even if the original generation
call was a mere spawn
(new
). This may come as a surprise, but it would probably be more
of a surprise if User.spawn.save
and User.generate
weren't comparable.