[Rspec-devel] possible addition to expectations...
dastels at daveastels.com
Mon Apr 24 10:34:41 EDT 2006
aslak hellesoy wrote:
> On 4/24/06, David Astels <dastels at daveastels.com> wrote:
>> Nice. But... it doesn't support the have... expectations.
> I got the impression Rich wanted feedback on the general idea. Support
> for have.. can be easily added.
> So what do you think about the idea? Something we want to add before
> 1.0? In my opinion it makes RSpec follow general Ruby naming
> conventions more closely. So I'm +1
I agree about having the _s. I'm not sure we want to roll it into 1.0
at this point. Possibly part of a 1.0.x point release.
It's a wicked cool approach but I have some small qualms about
overriding method_missing in object.
Let's give it some thought & disscussion.
More information about the Rspec-devel