f790c3c0c1
* Encapsulating the "why we hide/show" something Prior to this commit, we were relying on our views/templates to understand why it might want to append the "hidden" dom class. That is not ideal, because it required repeating knowledge about the conditions of the policy outside of the policy's domain. With this commit, we're removing a duplication of knowledge; or more appropriately asking the steward responsible for the knowledge to produce the answer. * Refining the note to not describe a course of action
100 lines
3.3 KiB
Ruby
100 lines
3.3 KiB
Ruby
require "rails_helper"
|
|
|
|
RSpec.describe ApplicationPolicy do
|
|
# rubocop:disable RSpec/DescribedClass
|
|
#
|
|
# [@jeremyf] Disabling this because I'm testing inner classes, and explicit "This is the class"
|
|
# seems like a legible approach.
|
|
describe ApplicationPolicy::NotAuthorizedError do
|
|
subject(:error) { ApplicationPolicy::NotAuthorizedError.new("Message") }
|
|
|
|
it { is_expected.to be_a(Pundit::NotAuthorizedError) }
|
|
it { is_expected.to be_a(ApplicationPolicy::NotAuthorizedError) }
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
describe ApplicationPolicy::UserSuspendedError do
|
|
subject(:error) { ApplicationPolicy::UserSuspendedError.new("Message") }
|
|
|
|
it { is_expected.to be_a(Pundit::NotAuthorizedError) }
|
|
it { is_expected.to be_a(ApplicationPolicy::NotAuthorizedError) }
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
describe ApplicationPolicy::UserRequiredError do
|
|
subject(:error) { ApplicationPolicy::UserRequiredError.new("Message") }
|
|
|
|
it { is_expected.to be_a(Pundit::NotAuthorizedError) }
|
|
it { is_expected.to be_a(ApplicationPolicy::NotAuthorizedError) }
|
|
end
|
|
# rubocop:enable RSpec/DescribedClass
|
|
|
|
describe ".dom_classes_for" do
|
|
[
|
|
[Article, :create?, "js-policy-article-create"],
|
|
[:Article, :create?, "js-policy-article-create"],
|
|
# Note the underscore for WorkerBee
|
|
[:WorkerBee, :create?, "js-policy-worker_bee-create"],
|
|
[Article.new(id: 5), :create, "js-policy-article-5-create"],
|
|
[Article.new, :create, "js-policy-article-new-create"],
|
|
[
|
|
Article.new,
|
|
:create,
|
|
"js-policy-article-new-create hidden",
|
|
# This needs to be a proc and not a lambda; if it's a lambda, the context for evaluation is
|
|
# wildly off. (and you need to do `before { instance_exec(&before_proc) }`); This is the
|
|
# way to make the `before` call below the least surprising.
|
|
proc {
|
|
allow(ArticlePolicy).to receive(:include_hidden_dom_class_for?).with(query: :create).and_return(true)
|
|
},
|
|
],
|
|
].each do |record, query, expected, before_proc|
|
|
context "when record=#{record.inspect} and query=#{query.inspect}#{' with hidden true' if before_proc}" do
|
|
subject { described_class.dom_classes_for(record: record, query: query) }
|
|
|
|
let(:record) { record }
|
|
let(:query) { query }
|
|
|
|
before(&before_proc) if before_proc
|
|
|
|
it { is_expected.to eq(expected) }
|
|
end
|
|
end
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
describe "require_user_in_good_standing!" do
|
|
subject(:method_call) { described_class.require_user_in_good_standing!(user: user) }
|
|
|
|
context "when no user given" do
|
|
let(:user) { nil }
|
|
|
|
it { within_block_is_expected.to raise_error ApplicationPolicy::UserRequiredError }
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
context "when given a user who is not suspended" do
|
|
let(:user) { User.new }
|
|
|
|
it { is_expected.to be_truthy }
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
context "when given a user who suspended" do
|
|
let(:user) { build(:user, :suspended) }
|
|
|
|
it { within_block_is_expected.to raise_error ApplicationPolicy::UserSuspendedError }
|
|
end
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
describe "require_user!" do
|
|
subject(:method_call) { described_class.require_user!(user: user) }
|
|
|
|
context "when no user given" do
|
|
let(:user) { nil }
|
|
|
|
it { within_block_is_expected.to raise_error ApplicationPolicy::UserRequiredError }
|
|
end
|
|
|
|
context "when given a user" do
|
|
let(:user) { User.new }
|
|
|
|
it { is_expected.to be_truthy }
|
|
end
|
|
end
|
|
end
|