[rspec-users] it_should_behave_like

David Chelimsky dchelimsky at gmail.com
Thu Jun 21 12:55:06 EDT 2007


On 6/21/07, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists at railsnewbie.com> wrote:
>
> What is the shared behavior between these two?  Do you want a valid,
> saved, and accepted contract to act like an unaccepted contract?
> Abstract out what is common between them, and then use that as the
> shared description.
>
> See:  http://pastie.caboo.se/72413

FYI - fixtures in shared behaviours don't ever get called. Just
declare them in the behaviours that use them.

>
> Best,
>
> Scott
>
>
> On Jun 21, 2007, at 10:24 AM, Jordan McKible wrote:
>
> > I'm trying to use it_should_behave_like, and something seems to be
> > wonky with the syntax.  When I add :shared=>true, the DSL complains
> > that the next line is the fixture declaration:
> >
> > /vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec
> > /dsl/behaviour_eval.rb:137:in `method_missing': undefined method
> > `fixtures' for #<Spec::DSL::EvalModule:0x324a2cc> (NoMethodError)
> >
> > Here's the spec http://pastie.caboo.se/72287
> >
> > Am I using it_should_behave_like properly?  Am I making a separate
> > mistake? I have RSpec setup as a svn external (currently rev2101).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jordan
> > http://jordan.mckible.com
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > rspec-users mailing list
> > rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>


More information about the rspec-users mailing list