[Rspec-devel] Feature requests
nyarly-rspec at redfivellc.com
Tue Aug 15 21:28:02 EDT 2006
I've run into a couple of minor irritations working with rspec recently.
Mostly, I really like working with rspec. Tidy DSL, good Rake
integration, built in mocks and coverage are all major boons. But:
proc.should_raise and should_not_raise both result in printing the
backtrace of the the RSpec failure they raise, rather than the
unexpected exception that was raised. This leads to a fair amount of
extra dev time spent hunting down the error, where a message along the
lines of "proc should not have raised, but instead raised:" and the
whole exception (not the standard Ruby "...400 lines skipped that
include the line you care about..." :)
Contrarywise, other expectations also print their entire backtrace,
which is rarely helpful and consumes a fair amount of scrollback and
Finally hash.should_has_key(:key) fails (<hash> doesn't respond to has?)
as do similar predicates (i.e. anything with an underscore).
It wouldn't hurt if mocks passed .and_return([1,2,3]) would treat that
as an expectation to be called at least 3 times, and warn if they were
told otherwise - it's certainly not Least Surprise when the class being
specced against fails because it's getting the wrong result.
Am I the voice in the wilderness here? I'm more than willing to submit
patches, if there's some chance they'll be accepted.
More information about the Rspec-devel