[LRUG] Expected response to be a <:redirect>, but was <200> when using should_redirect_to

[Riccardo Tacconi]

I do not get any output with this code

  context "should destroy participation" do
    setup do
      @configuration = Factory.create :configuration, :status => 'LIVE'
      @p = Factory.create :participation, :configuration => @configuration
      @admin = Factory.create :participant, :admin => true
      login_as @admin
    end

    should "delete :destroy participations" do
      assert_difference('Participation.count', -1) do
        delete :destroy, :id => @p.to_param
      end
    end

    app = ApplicationController.new
    puts app.response.body
    should_redirect_to("redirect to edit configuration") {
edit_configuration_path @configuration }
    # should_set_the_flash_to "The host has been unassociated."
  end

I think the problem is the shoulda context. I am realizing that Shoulda is
not so magic and it is complicating my tests instead of helping. Probably I
should try Rspec

On 27 July 2010 09:14, Glenn Gillen <glenn at rubypond.com> wrote:

> Just a "puts response.body" or the equivalent for webrat should be
> sufficient in your test (before the assertion).
>
> I suspect Matthews diagnosis is correct, I've been caught by it myself in
> the past.
>
> Glenn
>
> - Mistyped in a rush on my mobile
>
> On 27 Jul 2010, at 10:09, Riccardo Tacconi <rtacconi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Matthew,
>
> I have not used a debugger with Ruby yet.
>
> On 26 July 2010 18:21, Matthew Rudy Jacobs < <matthewrudyjacobs at gmail.com>
> matthewrudyjacobs at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> have you used debugger?
>> I suggest you see what the content actually looks like
>>
>> in particular response.body
>>
>> perhaps its actually some error page that is being displayed
>> and erroneously returning a 200
>>
>
> I think that is the case
>
>>
>> ie.
>> check what your output is exactly
>> before saying the assertion is broken.
>>
>>
> Yes, I am wondering how to intercept the output to have more info
>
>
>> most likely its the code thats broken.
>>
>>
>> On 26 July 2010 18:17, Riccardo Tacconi < <rtacconi at gmail.com>
>> rtacconi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I do not know if the test sends Accept text/html but I removed respond_to
>>> .html and left only the redirect, so it should redirect for every type of
>>> content, but I get the same message.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Riccardo
>>>
>>>
>>> On 26 July 2010 18:08, Tim Cowlishaw < <tim at timcowlishaw.co.uk>
>>> tim at timcowlishaw.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 26 Jul 2010, at 18:05, Riccardo Tacconi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Expected response to be a <:redirect>, but was <200>
>>>> >
>>>> > But why? That method really return a 302 (redirrect) method. Do I miss
>>>> something?
>>>>
>>>> does the request that your test sends have an Accepts header of
>>>> text/html? Since the redirect is within the respond_to html block, I think
>>>> it would return 200 for any other content types.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Tim
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Chat mailing list
>>>>  <Chat at lists.lrug.org>Chat at lists.lrug.org
>>>>  <http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org>
>>>> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Riccardo Tacconi
>>> Web developer at Wolseley UK
>>>
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardotacconi>
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardotacconi
>>>  <http://riccardotacconi.blogspot.com/>
>>> http://riccardotacconi.blogspot.com/
>>>  <http://twitter.com/rtacconi>http://twitter.com/rtacconi
>>> Linux user: #400461
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Chat mailing list
>>>  <Chat at lists.lrug.org>Chat at lists.lrug.org
>>>  <http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org>
>>> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chat mailing list
>>  <Chat at lists.lrug.org>Chat at lists.lrug.org
>>  <http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org>
>> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Riccardo Tacconi
> Web developer at Wolseley UK
>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardotacconi>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardotacconi
> <http://riccardotacconi.blogspot.com/>http://riccardotacconi.blogspot.com/
>  <http://twitter.com/rtacconi>http://twitter.com/rtacconi
> Linux user: #400461
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at lists.lrug.org
> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at lists.lrug.org
> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>
>


-- 
Riccardo Tacconi
Web developer at Wolseley UK

http://www.linkedin.com/in/riccardotacconi
http://riccardotacconi.blogspot.com/
http://twitter.com/rtacconi
Linux user: #400461
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20100727/d9790e04/attachment-0003.html>