[rspec-devel] need help getting a word right

David Chelimsky dchelimsky at gmail.com
Thu Jul 19 08:55:57 EDT 2007

On 7/19/07, Ian Dees <undees at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, all.
> Quoth Dave:

This makes me feel like the subject of poetry, Edgar.

> >   it do
> >     @thing.should be_something
> >   end
> > end
> ...
> > But "it do" is driving me mad :(
> You and me both:
> http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-devel/2007-April/002415.html

_____ minds think alike (fill in the blank - and "great" is not allowed).

> > We need a better word. Of course, 'specify' has not been completely
> > removed, so you can still do this:
> I know you're not totally sold on using "specify" here, but I think it
> looks okay.

It does look okay. I just really want a different word. I may not get
what I want.

> If you really want to move away from "specify," then would there be a
> way to keep "it" but add a do-nothing "return self" method to the
> example object?  Something like "must?"
> it.must do
>   @thing.should be_something
> end

If we were to do something like that we would probably use should:

it.should do
  @thing.should be_something

But that doesn't really work for me either. Structurally, I love this:

specify {@thing.should be_something}

I just really want a different word. We're saying "describe Thing",
and this word should indicate that the block represents a subset of
that description. One great word would be "facet":

describe Thing do
  facet {@thing.should be_something}

I don't want to use that word though because we may be using it for
something else. But that's the idea I'm pushing towards. Following
through an on-line thesaurus, starting from "facet", here are some
interesting options:

property {@thing.should be_something}
aspect {@thing.should be_something}
feature {@thing.should be_something}
dimension {@thing.should be_something}
characteristic {@thing.should be_something}
responsibility {@thing.should be_something}
quality {@thing.should be_something}
trait {@thing.should be_something}
perspective {@thing.should be_something}

Here are some amusing options:

peculiarity {@thing.should be_something}
idiosyncrasy {@thing.should be_something}

And, my personal favorite (from the amusement standpoint):

virtue {@thing.should be_something}

Any of these strike anybody as useful?

Of course, those are all nouns. We could use a verb ('specify', for
example). Again, using the thesaurus:

define {@thing.should be_something}
appoint {@thing.should be_something}
determine {@thing.should be_something}
prescribe {@thing.should be_something}
stipulate {@thing.should be_something}
allege {@thing.should be_something}
assign {@thing.should be_something}
refine {@thing.should be_something}
itemize {@thing.should be_something}
identify {@thing.should be_something}
appoint {@thing.should be_something}
establish {@thing.should be_something}
intend {@thing.should be_something}
submit {@thing.should be_something}
suggest {@thing.should be_something}
establish {@thing.should be_something}
impose {@thing.should be_something}
instruct {@thing.should be_something}
stipulate {@thing.should be_something}
say {@thing.should be_something}

Admittedly, some of those are just silly. But perhaps something
strikes you as useful. Or perhaps these lead to other ideas. Keep 'em


> --Ian
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel

More information about the rspec-devel mailing list