[rspec-users] Spec Naming (was: Rspec Brown Bag)

Luke Redpath contact at lukeredpath.co.uk
Tue Nov 21 12:06:58 EST 2006

I'm not sure if that would really work with RSpec - the way I see it,  
when you say a behaviour is *optional*, what you really  mean is that  
that behaviour only happens under certain circumstances (i.e. a  
particular context). Of course this is already handled by setting  
specifications under certain contexts. Within a particular context a  
behaviour either happens or it doesn't, I don't think there should be  
any middle ground. Ultimately we are only concerned with what WILL  
happen under certain contexts, not things that may or may not happen  
(which is an observation at a level higher than we are working on).


> object.must == value # => required; produces error
> object.should == value # => recommended; produces warning
> object.may == value # => informational message that an optional  
> feature is not provided
> Of course, the utility of this is questionable for RSpec.  It might  
> be interesting for a tool (not RSpec, but something like it) that's  
> essentially a portable specification language that can be applied  
> to more than one implementation.  But now we're not really talking  
> about BDD, so forgive me for straying OT.
> Cheers,
> /Nick
> [1]: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20061121/55376f21/attachment-0001.html 

More information about the rspec-users mailing list