chrisalley

chrisalley

ExUnit now has describe blocks which is a welcome addition coming from RSpec. In the docs, it states that nested hierarchies of describe blocks are forbidden, and instead developers should “build on top of named setups”. The following example used:

defmodule UserManagementTest do
  use ExUnit.Case, async: true

  describe "when user is logged in and is an admin" do
    setup [:log_user_in, :set_type_to_admin]

    test ...
  end

  describe "when user is logged in and is a manager" do
    setup [:log_user_in, :set_type_to_manager]

    test ...
  end

  defp log_user_in(context) do
    # ...
  end
end

For comparsion, here’s how I might lay out the same test using RSpec:

RSpec.describe UserManagement, type: :model do
  describe "some method" do
    context "when user is logged in" do
      before do
        ..
      end

      context "when user is an admin" do
        before do
          ...
        end

        it ...
      end

      context "when user is a manager" do
         before do
           ...
         end

         it ...
      end
    end
  end
end

The reasoning for ExUnit way is solid - it’s easier to glance at a single describe block in isolation and understand exactly what is going on. However, coming from RSpec, the ability the lay out multiple contexts as described above is useful for covering all scenarios. In particular, if there’s three or four different contexts that need to be checked, including different combinations of each, having a hierarchy can help to lay out all of the different pathways through the code. If the contexts are keep flat, we would end up with very long describe/context strings, e.g. “when user is logged in and user is an admin and user is an author and user is a publisher”.

Since ExUnit doesn’t support nested describe/context blocks, what are some alternative strategies to describe these more complex sets of contexts?

Showing Posts 1 to 4

georgeguimaraes

georgeguimaraes

What do you think about breaking each context (logged in) in its own file?

josevalim

josevalim

Creator of Elixir

Since ExUnit doesn’t support nested describe/context blocks, what are some alternative strategies to describe these more complex sets of contexts?

Your first approach is the alternative. Sometimes we get too hung up on reducing duplication and we forget the downsides of trying to “unify” everything, such as coupling and loss of context. ExUnit wants you to define everything in two lines (the describe and setup) because the next person reading the file will have a better understanding of what is happening.

Go back to a project that uses nested describes/context and try to find out what a single test is doing. This is going to be the process:

  1. You will find the test and try to find the outer most describe
  2. Put “user is logged in” (the outermost describe) in your brain stack
  3. Then find and put “and is a manager” in your brain stack
  4. Then find and put “with multiple accounts” in your brain stack
  5. Remove “with multiple accounts” from your brain stack (because that context has ended without reaching your test)
  6. Then find and put “with a single account” in your brain stack
  7. Found the test

It is such a hassle.

The describe is there to describe what your test is doing. Be descriptive.

43
Post #2
chrisalley

chrisalley OP

Thanks for the detailed response, @josevalim. Having dealt with some complex nested specs, I can certainly relate to the desire for decoupling and explicitness when examining individual tests.

My main concern is how to structure contexts without a literal tree of code. But as @georgeguimaraes suggested, the contexts could be placed into seperate files. This would in practice create a kind of hierarchy, with the folder containing the context files acting as the parent. If required, further subfolders could be created to represent grandparent contexts, creating a tree of folders and files instead of a tree of code. Each test would still have the full description of the context in the describe statement so that the test can be understood in isolation, while the folder structure would represent the structure of the many pathways through the code. I imagine a lot of RSpec tests could benefit from this kind of restructuring too, rather than being placed in one giant file that covers every context that the class being tested can be in.

tjstankus

tjstankus

Having many pathways through your code is complicating your tests. If you’re going for full test coverage, your tests end up as the Cartesian product of the branches in your code, requiring new test cases exponentially as you add branches. The underlying solution is not to hone in on a way to nest your tests, but to able to test contexts independently. In Ruby and Elixir this is achieved through polymorphism. To use your example, you would test admin behavior and manager behavior independently and treat user polymorphically in code that depends upon user.

— All posts loaded —

Where Next? Top

Trending in Questions Top

katta
I having some trouble figuring out if I have set myself too strict of standards for my production server. Currently I can handle 75% of r...
New
peck
Hi everyone. My team and I have been working on a fairly modest app based around video streaming and chat, but we’ve landed a customer t...
New
achenet
Hello, I’m trying to build a basic Phoenix web-app, and I’d like to use Tailwind. However, when I launch mix phx.server, I get an error...
New
bradley
I really like the adapter patterns that ecto, nebulex, waffle, etc. use and would love find something similar for a key management servic...
New
unaware8150
Hello folks! So at work, we are seeing some situations where we have to define some “fixed” strings that are used across the codebase in...
New
Cxx-mlr
I’m working on a small exercise involving update_in/3, and I came up with this solution: data = %{ name: "Periodic Table", category:...
New
Alvinkariuki
How Can I Optimise Compile Time Dependencies I have been building an elixir application for about 2 years now. Many modules and files ha...
New

Other Trending Topics Top

GenericJam
Edit: 2026 May 15 - This post is archived. Mob is alive!! Main docs: mob v0.7.11 — Documentation A bit of explanation for the slightly c...
New
budgie
A little off-topic, but I feel like people here have a good head on their shoulders. I used to be quite good at making software. Was luc...
New
KristerV
Hey. Is there anyone here who creates agents in their apps? Not talking about using agents, but creating them. I’m finding it pretty diff...
New
mudasobwa
I fully migrated to my own harness from Anthropic/Gemini and I think it’s time to share it. Welcome DSH, the DeepSeek Harness, fully writ...
New
jimsynz
Beam Bots (or just BB for short) is a framework for building fault-tolerant robotics applications in Elixir using familiar OTP patterns. ...
New
juhalehtonen
There has been a thread to discuss the Stack Overflow Developer Survey on this forum every year since 2018, so here’s yet another one for...
New

We're in Beta

About us Mission Statement

Options

Thread Display Mode




Thread Preview

Skip Thread Previews