rspec - Is calling the method I'm testing in a before block bad practice? -

# first "should render china's jobs page country_name china"   'show', country: 'china'   expect(assigns(:title)).to eq("#{location.country} tech jobs")   expect(response).to be_success end  # second context "with country name"   before { 'show', country: 'china' }   { expect(assigns(:title)).to eq("#{location.country} tech jobs") }   { expect(response).to be_success } end 

which 1 think better? prefer second 1 if before { 'show' } not bad practice.

i wouldn't it's bad practice, have downsides:

• it's slower. in second case, it's got 2 examples, each of runs get 'show', country: 'china' -- can cause noticeable slowness when get 'show' slow.
• it produces documentation output (to me @ least) doesn't describe behavior well. compare --format doc output 2 cases.
• it makes harder add setup additional examples may add in future. consider if there's future case need test needs particular records inserted in db work properly. because action being tested (get 'show') in before block rather in example body, can't add additional setup 1 example needs it. (you can, of course, add additional setup before block itself, exacerbate slowness issue).

there benefits using before block. makes easy follow "one expectation per example" guideline. in turn give separate failing or passing examples assigns , response status expectations, can make more clear precisely failing, example.

which use depends on tradeoffs want make. tend towards first example (no before block).

on side note, if use latter form, i'd use specify alias (rather it) because use it when doc string or matcher reads english expression off of it:

specify { expect(assigns(:title)).to eq("#{location.country} tech jobs") } specify { expect(response).to be_success }