[rspec-users] helper methods starting with should
aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com
Sun Nov 18 11:29:54 EST 2007
On Nov 18, 2007 4:59 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> As an experiment in playing nice with others, we've added the ability
> in rspec's trunk to do this:
> class ThingExamples < Spec::ExampleGroup
> def should_do_stuff
> This is how rspec 0.1 worked, and for people already comfortable with
> the classes/methods approach of Test::Unit, it is a more comfortable
> entry point to rspec.
> For others, however, it has created a problem: you can't write helper
> methods that start with should_ because rspec treats them as examples.
> Quick show of hands, please:
> +1 (with comments please) for keeping the ability to write examples
> using should_
> -1 (with comments please) for bagging it because you think you should
> be able to write helper methods that start with should_.
-1. I don't want to encourage a third style for examples (#test_* and
RSpec #it is enough). It doesn't bring anything new to the table,
when #it can be used inside TestCase classes.
> You may want to peek at the conversation on this ticket before you
> respond: http://rubyforge.org/tracker/?func=detail&atid=3149&aid=15638&group_id=797
> Thanks for playing,
> ps - In the interest of full disclosure, this is not going to be a
> majority vote. My interest is in making rspec more accessible to
> people who are likely not on this list and whose voices will not be
> heard. I'm just looking to take a pulse from a wider group than the
> few that have commented on the ticket.
> pps - One suggestion that came up was to make this a configuration
> option. I don't love that because it makes rspec more complicated, but
> it's a possibility.
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
More information about the rspec-users