What is the correct format for using shoulda-matchers and RSpec\'s new expect syntax?
While one could certainly use the shoulda-matchers with the new expect syntax as follows:
it 'should validate presence of :email' do
expect(subject).to validate_presence_of :email
end
or the more concise but less readable:
it { expect(subject).to validate_presence_of :email }
the one-liner should
format these matchers are typically used with is explicitly supported in 2.14 even when config.syntax == :expect
. When should
is being used with an implicit subject as in:
describe User
it { should validate_presence_of :email }
end
it does not rely on the monkey patching of Kernel
that should
otherwise depends on.
This is covered in https://github.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/blob/master/Should.md. In fact, that documentation even uses the above shoulda
matcher example to illustrate this exception.
See also Using implicit `subject` with `expect` in RSpec-2.11, which discusses a configuration option which lets you use as an alternative to it
.
expect_it { to validate_presence_of :email }
Update: As of RSpec 3.0 (beta2), you will also be able to use:
it { is_expected.to validate_presence_of :email }
I'll suplement the answer of @peter-alfvin. In case you test the model and its migration themselves with shoulda-matchers
you can't use :expect
outside of it
block, so can't write:
RSpec.describe ModelName, type: :model do
expect(subject).to belong_to(:user)
end
And you will get the expection:
`expect` is not available on an example group (e.g. a `describe` or `context` block).
but correct version is:
RSpec.describe ModelName, type: :model do
it { expect(subject).to belong_to(:user) }
end