[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Test::Unit Equivalent of JUnit @AfterClass

Patrick Joyce

11/8/2007 5:56:00 AM

Hey,

Does anyone know a way to do the equivalent of @AfterClass in
Test::Unit? I need to execute some code once after ALL the test_*
methods in a Test::Unit::TestCase have run (teardown runs after EACH
method).

The reason I need to do this is that Rails leaves old fixture data in
the DB after each TestCase is run. This just doesn't seem right to me,
as I think each TestCase should start with the same state, but that is
another issue. The immediate problem is that this can cause tests to
fail if there are foreign key constraints. For example:

TestCase1 < Test::Unit::TestCase
fixtures :testa, :testb
end

TestCase2 < Test::Unit:TestCase
fixtures :testa
end

If testb has a foreign key that depends upon testa, the second
TestCase will fail since it will only try to delete from table testa
and there are records in table testb that depend on testa.

Cliff Moon of PhillyOnRails wrote a plugin
(http://agilewebdevelopment.com/plugins/foreign_ke...) to solve
this problem, but the svn repository seems to be down.

Another note: I only noticed this when setting up my cruisecontrol.rb
for my project. The normal "rake test" task sets up the Test DB schema
from schema.rb which ignores foreign keys. So if you have foreign keys
in your DB be aware that there is a good chance you are running your
tests without them.

Any ideas?

- Patrick Joyce
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....
3 Answers

Ryan Davis

11/8/2007 7:39:00 AM

0


On Nov 7, 2007, at 21:55 , Patrick Joyce wrote:

> The reason I need to do this is that Rails leaves old fixture data in
> the DB after each TestCase is run. This just doesn't seem right to me,
> as I think each TestCase should start with the same state, but that is
> another issue. The immediate problem is that this can cause tests to
> fail if there are foreign key constraints. For example:

No, it isn't another issue... it is bug 2404 in the rails bug db.

http://dev.rubyonrails.org/t...

Patrick Joyce

11/8/2007 8:23:00 AM

0

Ryan Davis wrote:

> No, it isn't another issue... it is bug 2404 in the rails bug db.
>
> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/t...

Thanks, I don't know how I missed that ticket in all my searching.

How did you end up working around the problem? Did you use the initial
"nuke_fixtures" patch? Did you add all the fixtures with foreign keys to
each test? (that looks like the easiest solution, but just doesn't seem
right)
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

Daniel Berger

11/8/2007 3:38:00 PM

0



On Nov 8, 12:39 am, Ryan Davis <ryand-r...@zenspider.com> wrote:
> On Nov 7, 2007, at 21:55 , Patrick Joyce wrote:
>
> > The reason I need to do this is that Rails leaves old fixture data in
> > the DB after each TestCase is run. This just doesn't seem right to me,
> > as I think each TestCase should start with the same state, but that is
> > another issue. The immediate problem is that this can cause tests to
> > fail if there are foreign key constraints. For example:
>
> No, it isn't another issue... it is bug 2404 in the rails bug db.
>
> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/t...

It's our favorite bug Ryan!

Yep, going OT here...

That bug alone really made my Rails test suite suffer for an existing
app. I don't even try to implement FK's at the database layer any more
with Rails as a result.

I wonder if Merb fixed this...

Regards,

Dan