[rspec-devel] Multiple formatters
aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com
Tue May 1 07:45:18 EDT 2007
On 5/1/07, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists at railsnewbie.com> wrote:
> On Apr 24, 2007, at 4:41 AM, aslak hellesoy wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > RSpec supports multiple formatters, but currently you can only use one
> > at a time. I really need to use several at the same time.
> > I'd like to make RSpec handle several --format options. However, that
> > would require some rethinking of how/where output is written - it
> > can't all go to the same stream (file or stdout).
> > So I'm thinking of making --format take a composite argument:
> > --format html:/path/to/index.html --format rdoc:/path/to/index.rdoc
> > --format progress
> > If nothing comes after the format, output is STDOUT, so this would be
> > backwards compatible.
> > If we do this, we could also get rid of --failures - it would just be
> > a special formatter.
> > WDYT?
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-devel mailing list
> > rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-devel
> I've seen that you've already implemented this in trunk.
> I'm not running the latest version of trunk, but I've noticed that in
> 0.9RC1, when specifying a failures file and an examples file, that
> the following behavior is exhibited by rspec:
> 1. If the file exists, but is empty, rspec will run all specs
> 2. If the file exists, but contains failing examples, these failing
> specs will be run
> 3. If the file does not exists, it creates the file (through --
> failures - now --format e:filename), but runs no specs.
> Would a patch addressing the third case (which would mimic the first
> case) be a welcome addition to rspec?
It would, but how do you suggest that RSpec guesses that you meant a
file, and not the name of a behaviour or example?
> rspec-devel mailing list
> rspec-devel at rubyforge.org
More information about the rspec-devel