[rspec-devel] dogfood time?

David Chelimsky dchelimsky at gmail.com
Wed Oct 11 15:28:53 EDT 2006

On 10/11/06, Dave Astels <dastels at daveastels.com> wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> On 10-Oct-06, at 10:27 PM, aslak hellesoy wrote:
> > A while ago I brought up the idea of making RSpec self-hosting. I.e.
> > completely ditch RSpec's own Test::Unit tests and use RSpec to verify
> > itself during the build process.
> >
> > One of the counter arguments that came up (I think it was Dave) was
> > "what if we have bugs that get masked".
> >
> > I think that at this point RSpec core is mature enough to make it
> > worth the risk. I think the risk of having masked bugs is minimal - I
> > think we'd discover it quickly if it happened.
> >
> > What do you think? Is it time to trust our own tool and eat our own
> > dogfood?
> > (We'd check in the test2spec generated translations, reformat them and
> > delete the Test::Unit tests plus test2spec)
> I think you're right that it's ready for that now.
> +1


One word of caution on this. There are test/unit tests that don't get
translated in the build because they test things like the ability of
partial mocks to attach themselves to the Specification that is
current running. When running a Specification INSIDE a Specification,
the mocks attach themselves to the wrong spec. So this area will need
to be restructured such that we can translate all of the specs before
we follow through on this.

That said, I love the idea of rspec spec'ing itself.

More information about the rspec-devel mailing list