User: I want to make an rspec test for this method, testing that the resulting vendor_inquiry has the correct data. I have the values stubbed but what would the expectaitons look like"     def create_legal_name_vendor_inquiry_and_decision(decision)       vendor_inquiry = decision.vendor_inquiries.create!(         vendor: VendorInquiry.vendors[:legal_name_update_dec_plat],         raw_response: decision.attributes,         external_id: dec_plat_decision_id,       )        vendor_inquiry.create_vendor_decision!(         result: outcome_allow? ? Decision.results[:pass] : Decision.results[:fail],         reason: outcome_allow? ? nil : VendorDecision.reasons[:failed_dec_plat],       )     end 

Assistant:  CertainlyCertainly! To write an RSpec test for the `create_legal_name_vendor_inquiry_and_decision` method, you want to:
- stub the necessary values,
- call the method,
- then check that the resulting `vendor_inquiry` record is created with the correct attributes,
- and that its associated `vendor_decision` also has the correct data.

Here's a sample RSpec test structure showing how you might write the expectations based on your method:

```ruby
RSpec.describe YourClass do
  describe '#create_legal_name_vendor_inquiry_and_decision' do
    let(:decision) { instance_double('Decision') }
    let(:vendor_inquiry) { instance_double('VendorInquiry') }
    let(:vendor_decision) { instance_double('VendorDecision') }
    
    before do
      # Stub attributes and methods used in the method
      allow(decision).to receive(:vendor_inquiries).and_return(double(create!: vendor_inquiry))
      allow(decision).to receive(:attributes).and_return({ some: 'attributes' })
      allow(subject).to receive(:dec_plat_decision_id).and_return('external-id-123')
      allow(subject).to receive(:outcome_allow?).and_return(true) # or false
      
      # Stub VendorInquiry.vendors enum value
      allow(VendorInquiry).to receive(:vendors).and_return({ legal_name_update_dec_plat: 42 })
      
      # Stub creation of vendor_decision
      allow(vendor_inquiry).to receive(:create_vendor_decision!).and_return(vendor_decision)
    end
    
    it 'creates a vendor_inquiry with correct attributes and associated vendor_decision' do
      # Call the method
      subject.create_legal_name_vendor_inquiry_and_decision(decision)
      
      # Expect vendor_inquiry to be created with correct params
      expect(decision.vendor_inquiries).to have_received(:create!).with(
        hash_including(
          vendor: 42,
          raw_response: decision.attributes,
          external_id: 'external-id-123',
        )
      )
      
      # Expect vendor_decision creation with correct params based on outcome_allow? value
      expected_result = subject.outcome_allow? ? Decision.results[:pass] : Decision.results[:fail]
      expected_reason = subject.outcome_allow? ? nil : VendorDecision.reasons[:failed_dec_plat]
      
      expect(vendor_inquiry).to have_received(:create_vendor_decision!).with(
        hash_including(
          result: expected_result,
          reason: expected_reason
        )
      )
    end
  end
end
```

### Key points for the expectations:
- `decision.vendor_inquiries.create!` gets called with a hash containing:
  - `vendor` set to `VendorInquiry.vendors[:legal_name_update_dec_plat]`,
  - `raw_response` set to `decision.attributes`,
  - `external_id` set to `dec_plat_decision_id`.
  
- `vendor_inquiry.create_vendor_decision!` gets called with:
  - `result` set depending on `outcome_allow?` — `Decision.results[:pass]` if true, else `Decision.results[:fail]`,
  - `reason` set to `nil` if `outcome_allow?` true, else `VendorDecision.reasons[:failed_dec_plat]`.

---

### Notes:
- Replace `YourClass` and `subject` with the actual class/module or instance you are testing.
- You might want to adjust stubbing to your actual test setup (e.g., use factory objects instead of doubles if appropriate).
- `have_received` matcher works when you spy on/stub a method to capture calls. Alternatively, you can spy directly or inject mocks.
- If you do integration style tests hitting the DB, you might create actual records and verify their attributes instead of stubbing in this way.

Let me know if you want an example for integration style tests!
User: bad scifi movies that start with Q - go!
Assistant:  HereHere are some bad sci-fi movies that start with the letter Q:

1. **Q: The Winged Serpent** (although more of a cult campy horror, some classify it as sci-fi/fantasy)
2. **Quarantine 2: Terminal** (a found-footage style horror with sci-fi elements, generally critically panned)
3. **Quarantine** (similar to above, often criticized for poor quality)
   
There aren’t a lot of sci-fi movies starting with Q, especially “bad” ones, but these tend to get mixed receptions or cult following largely for their low budget and campy qualities.

If you want more suggestions or a broader letter range, let me know!
User: yarn test with less output just show failing tests
User: git config --global user.signingkey /PATH/TO/.SSH/KEY.PUB << where might this key be on mac
User: crappy sci fi movies that start with p
User: be_success rspec
Assistant:  TheThe `be_success` matcher in RSpec was commonly used with controller specs in older versions of Rails to check for successful HTTP responses (like status 200). However, it's deprecated and removed in newer versions of RSpec/Rails.

### What is `be_success`?

- It matches if the response is a successful response (usually HTTP 200–299).
- You might see usage like: `expect(response).to be_success`

### Modern equivalents

- Use more explicit matchers, such as:

```ruby
expect(response).to have_http_status(:success)   # matches 200 OK
expect(response).to have_http_status(200)        # matches status code 200
```

### Summary:

- `be_success` checks if the response was a success
- Deprecated now — use `have_http_status(:success)` or similar instead.

---

### Example in controller spec:

```ruby
describe SomeController do
  describe "GET #index" do
    it "responds successfully" do
      get :index
      expect(response).to have_http_status(:success)
    end
  end
end
```

---

If you meant something else by `be_success`, or need an example for non-Rails code, please clarify!
User: binding.pry opposite of step
Assistant:  InIn `pry-byebug`, the opposite of `step` (which steps *into* a method) is usually either:

- `next`: which steps *over* the current line (executes the line but doesn’t enter into called methods),
- or `finish` (aka `step out`), which runs until the current method returns.

So:

- `step` — step into the next method call,
- `next` — step over the method call,
- `finish` — continue until you exit the current stack frame.

If you want to avoid going *into* methods, use `next`.

If you want to run out of the current method, use `finish`.

Example:

```text
pry(#)<step    # step into method calls
pry(#)<next    # step over the current line
pry(#)<finish  # continue until method returns
```

These commands are the "opposites" in terms of how deeply you want to debug.
User: 5% of 1.5 just tell me
Assistant:  00.075
User: 5% of 1,500000
Assistant:  55% of 1,500,000 is 75,000.
User: what does exit -1 do in shell
Assistant:  InIn a shell script or terminal command, `exit -1` causes the script or shell to terminate with an exit status of `-1`.

**However, exit status codes in Unix/Linux shells are interpreted as unsigned 8-bit integers.** That means the exit code is taken modulo 256.

- So `exit -1` is equivalent to `exit 255` (because `-1 mod 256 = 255`).
- The exit code range is 0–255, where:
  - `0` generally indicates success,
  - any nonzero value indicates some kind of error or failure.

### Summary:
- `exit -1` terminates the script and returns exit code `255` to the calling process.
- Exit codes outside `0-255` get wrapped due to 8-bit limitation.

If you want to indicate a general error, you might usually do `exit 1` instead.

---

### Example:

```bash
$ exit -1
$ echo $?
255
```

Here, `$?` is the exit status of the last command, showing 255 instead of -1.
User: so a -1 would cause a circleci job to fail rght?
Assistant: