Machinist vs FactoryGirl - pros and cons

Question

I'm working with factory_girl, but looking at the machinist gem. Could you tell me please - what are the pros and cons of migrating to machinist? Have you compared those libs?

Jessalyn

not a direct answer to your question, but you might also check out miniskirt: stephencelis.com/2010/01/11/miniskirt.html ... as a factory_girl user, I like how this simple lib approaches factories with better syntax and less weight. – Quintal

machinist? factory girl? miniskirt? what kind of forum did I stumble into? – Acetate

@DonalBoyle you could be impressed more if you will know that there is also a factory_boy :) – Unpile

Answer 1

Machinist was actually heavily inspired by factory_girl, but varied because machinist's author wanted a different syntax. Since then, factory_girl added different syntax layers to simulate other factory libraries (including machinist's "blueprint" syntax). In other words, both are extremely similar, just with a different default syntax. Personally, I use factory_girl.

Admixture

Answer 2

Actually, Machinist has a big advantage over Factory Girl: it doesn't hit the DB for associated objects. Look here:

Machinist vs Factory Girl: Machinist win!

Still not sure about how Machinist handles this, but anyhow it could be a huge performance boost for your test base.

Potamic

Just noticed in this screencast that you can use FactoryGirl.build if you don't want to hit the database. Probably a new feature. – Angleworm

FactoryGirl.build actually hists the database for associated objects. FactoryGirl.build_stubbed creates objects without hitting the database. – Mannish

Answer 3

I've not used machinist before, but I can say factory_girl is quite easy to use, extend and rip out any rails-centricness it has to be used in any type of project.

Twaddle