[rspec-users] given_it

lancecarlson at gmail.com lancecarlson at gmail.com
Fri Sep 21 16:11:45 EDT 2007


This concept violates oo if you want to test whether or not r method calls another method you would do that in the test and label it occordingly. What you are defining is such a narrow use case I think it would be abused
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

-----Original Message-----
From: "David Chelimsky" <dchelimsky at gmail.com>

Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 22:03:30 
To:rspec-users <rspec-users at rubyforge.org>
Subject: Re: [rspec-users] given_it


On 9/21/07, Yurii Rashkovskii <yrashk at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sure! But they are not the same stuff. What I was looking for is
>
> it "should do #1" do
>   ...
> end
> it "should do X after #1" do
>   given_it "should do #1"
>   should do_x
> end
> it "should do Y after #1" do
>   given_it "should do #1"
>   should do_y
> end
> it "should do Z after #1 Y" do
>   given_it "should do Y after #1"
>   should do_z
> end

Sorry mate - that just seems like endless confusion - the examples
should never rely on each other that way - different animal from
scenarios that involve steps.

>
> Or am I missing somethiing?
>
>
> On Sep 21, 2007, at 10:49 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
> > Have you seen shared behaviours?
> >
> > On 9/21/07, Yurii Rashkovskii <yrashk at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Just decided to check whether I am doing something that makes sense
> >> or not. I was thinking about how cool would it be to re-use examples
> >> (just like we reuse story scenarios with GivenScenario). I was not
> >> sure if this possibility already exists in rspec (and, honestly, was
> >> lazy to check), so I have created this helper:
> >>
> >> def given_it(name)
> >>    example_definition = behaviour.example_definitions.find{|i|
> >> i.description == name }
> >>    instance_eval(&example_definition.example_block)
> >> end
> >>
> >> so it is possible to write things like
> >>
> >> it "should do something after another action" do
> >>    given_it "should successfully do another action"
> >>    do_something.should be_fine
> >> end
> >>
> >> Is there anything already in rspec that allows me to do the same
> >> stuff? Or was it a bad idea at all?
> >>
> >> Yurii.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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