Added tests for the concern and member model

spec/factories/like.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+FactoryGirl.define do
+  factory :like do
+    member 
+    association :likeable, :factory => "post"
+  end
+
+end

spec/models/member_spec.rb

@@ -71,6 +71,14 @@ describe 'member' do
       @member.forums.length.should == 2
     end
 
+    it "has many likes" do
+      @post1 = FactoryGirl.create(:post, :author => @member)
+      @post2 = FactoryGirl.create(:post, :author => @member)
+      @like1 = FactoryGirl.create(:like, :member => @member, :likeable => @post1)
+      @like2 = FactoryGirl.create(:like, :member => @member, :likeable => @post2)
+      expect(@member.likes.length).to eq 2
+    end
+
     it 'has location and lat/long fields' do
       @member.update_attributes(:location => 'Greenwich, UK')
       @member.location.should eq 'Greenwich, UK'

spec/models/post_spec.rb

@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@ describe Post do
     @member = FactoryGirl.create(:member)
   end
 
+  it_behaves_like "it is likeable"
+
   it "should be sorted in reverse order" do
     FactoryGirl.create(:post,
       :subject => 'first entry',

spec/support/is_likeable.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+shared_examples "it is likeable" do
+  
+  before(:each) do
+    # Possibly a horrible hack.
+    # Will fail if factory name does not match the model name..
+    @likeable = FactoryGirl.create(described_class.to_s.underscore.to_sym)
+    @member1 = FactoryGirl.create(:member)
+    @member2 = FactoryGirl.create(:member)
+    @like1 = FactoryGirl.create(:like, :member => @member1, :likeable => @likeable)
+    @like2 = FactoryGirl.create(:like, :member => @member2, :likeable => @likeable)
+  end
+
+  it "has many likes" do
+    expect(@likeable.likes.length).to eq 2
+  end
+
+  it 'has many members that likes it' do
+    expect(@likeable.members.length).to eq 2
+  end
+
+  it 'should destroy the like when it is destroyed' do
+    like_count = @likeable.likes.count
+    expect {
+      @likeable.destroy
+    }.to change(Like, :count).by -like_count
+  end
+end