[rspec-users] [Cucumber] a few clarifications please...
dchelimsky at gmail.com
Wed Dec 17 16:53:10 EST 2008
On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Tim Walker <walketim at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you David. This helps a lot. Question, if there are matching
> steps...will cucumber find the first matching step during execution? I
> noticed a test executing at higher line numbers and then picking up a
> step with a lower line number.
Again, cucumber looks at all of the steps and throws an error if more
than one will match your step. So order should not be an issue.
> Thanks again,
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 2:22 PM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Tim Walker <walketim at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Guys,
>>> Things are working great with Cucumber and am getting better at
>>> expressing requirements as behaviors. Kudos!
>>> I seek a couple of points of clarification, or confirmation, if
>>> someone has a minute or two...
>>> FWIW - I've read the wiki and the given-when-then page and just seek
>>> There is no dependency implied in the keywords "given", "then" and
>>> "when" (as well as "and" and "but), correct? These are simply naming
>>> conventions that denote the well known "Build/Operate/Check" pattern
>>> but have no real physical relationship, they're just tags that denote
>>> the steps.
>>> A "pending" step is any step that has a matching step but nothing is
>>> A "successful" step is any step that is matched, has some code and
>>> doesn't assert anything resolving to false.
>> Or raise an error.
>>> A "gray" out step means that no steps were found that matched the feature.
>> Blue? Means that a step was found, but a previous step was either
>> pending or failed.
>>> You need to be careful that features do not match steps in the step
>>> file or cucumber will execute the first step it finds that matches
>>> (really don't know how this works, will a test sequence ever go
>> Cucumber tells you when it finds two steps definitions that could
>> match the step in the feature.
>>> Going back and changing the stuff in the .feature file is risky as
>>> it's very easy to create a mismatch and the step won't be found.
>> Not sure why that is risky, unless you mean that there are
>> non-developers making these changes. If so, then they should probably
>> be made collaboratively.
>>> Thanks very much,
>>> rspec-users mailing list
>>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
>> rspec-users mailing list
>> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
More information about the rspec-users