[rspec-users] autogenerated it (was 'Custom Matcher and NAME NOT GENERATED annoyance')

Luis Lavena luislavena at gmail.com
Fri May 4 23:22:01 EDT 2007


On 5/5/07, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
> > I only see use for one expectation, auto-generated ones.
>
> That's what I'm talking about. In other words, "it" definitely works
> for non-auto-generated names:
>
> describe Thing do
>   it "should do stuff" do
>
> I'm specifically looking for an alias that works well for
> auto-generated names, so if "the" only works well in that situation
> I'm OK w/ that.
>
> The thing I'm wondering is whether "the" would work for the majority
> of auto-generated-name examples, and whether it pushes you
> psychologically towards a certain type of example. It makes sense when
> you say:
>
> describe Thing do
>   the { @thing.should do_something }
>
> or.....
>
> describe Thing do
>   a { @thing.should do_something }
>
> But what other shapes do we need to consider?
>

'a' or 'the' could cover almost everything when talking of a specific
model/object instance, like the examples I provided.

for other cases, like the ones present in examples/ folder
(auto_spec_description_example.rb) will sound a bit awkward:

  it { 3.should be < 5 }

  it { ["a"].should include("a") }

  it { [1,2,3].should respond_to(:size) }


WTH, even 'it' sounds weird in that context.

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
Leaders are made, they are not born. They are made by hard effort,
which is the price which all of us must pay to achieve any goal that
is worthwhile.
Vince Lombardi


More information about the rspec-users mailing list