Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Compatibility issue with shoulda-matcher 5.2.0 #56

Open
dubsdaazn opened this issue Nov 7, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Compatibility issue with shoulda-matcher 5.2.0 #56

dubsdaazn opened this issue Nov 7, 2022 · 0 comments

Comments

@dubsdaazn
Copy link

It appears the latest version of shoulda-matchers 5.2.0 change the way they implemented #define_enum_for with #with_values causing specs to fail.

in the model (task)

  enum status: {
    validating: 0, review: 1, processing: 2, completed: 3, completed_with_errors: 4, failed: 5, cancelled: 6
  } do
     # event block...
  end

in the spec

    it 'defines all required states' do
      expect(task).to define_enum_for(:status)
        .with_values(%w[validating review processing completed completed_with_errors failed cancelled])
    end

throws a failure of

       Expected Task to define :status as an enum backed by an integer, mapping
       ‹"validating"› to ‹0›, ‹"review"› to ‹1›, ‹"processing"› to ‹2›,
       ‹"completed"› to ‹3›, ‹"completed_with_errors"› to ‹4›, ‹"failed"› to
       ‹5›, and ‹"cancelled"› to ‹6›. (we can't tell which).

using shoulda-matcher 5.1.0 this test passes, using 5.2.0 it fails

It appears it is because they changed one of the checks in define_enum_for in 5.1.0
https://github.com/thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers/blob/781ecd06f2611b58585cb4f9d2be38326e88fcc5/lib/shoulda/matchers/active_record/define_enum_for_matcher.rb#L389

to this in 5.2.0
https://github.com/thoughtbot/shoulda-matchers/blob/8a701024bd0a1a3219d1a5786ca3dd928f827436/lib/shoulda/matchers/active_record/define_enum_for_matcher.rb#L423

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant