[rspec-users] Creating stories for the second resource. Very wet appro

[Bart Zonneveld]

On 17 apr 2008, at 15:44, Joseph Wilk wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've come across a similar problem. Sharing the steps is the easy bit.
> And I've started to create a 'useful_steps.rb' for storing very common
> steps.

So have I. I use a lot of "Given a number of flurps in the system",  
and "When I add a new zoink", most as as refactored and abstracted as  
possible in common_steps.rb. Also, a form_steps.rb for common webrat  
steps.

> I have just copy and pasted the plain text stories before but since  
> they
> use the same steps, there was little new steps to write.

..which isn't wrong per se imho. Steps for removing, and editing a  
post all start from the same initial state, "Given an existing post".

> It feels like the steps are where you want to keep it dry but the
> stories are the domain specific language to writing
> acceptance/integration tests.

Exactly. Stories may share steps, but the overal flow is always  
different. If not, your stories aren't 100% accurate.

> So it is similar problem to saying that models contain lots of
> 'has_ones' and hence are not dry.

Nice analogy :)

gr,
bartz

> Well thats the conclusions I've been coming to after using stories  
> for a
> while.
>
> --
> Joseph Wilk
> http://www.joesniff.co.uk
>
>
>
> Tim Haines wrote:
>> Hi y'all
>>
>> I'm about to start writing up the stories for my second resource.   
>> The
>> second resource is so similar to the first that I feel a good way  
>> for me
>> to
>> start might be to copy and paste the stories and edit from there.   
>> This
>> seems very anti-dry though.  Am I missing something obvious, or would
>> you
>> expect (and be happy with) a lot of duplication between stories?
>>
>> Tim.
>
> -- 
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users