[rspec-users] bad specs better than none?

Maurício Linhares mauricio.linhares at gmail.com
Wed Feb 27 23:01:04 EST 2008


On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 2:59 AM, aslak hellesoy
<aslak.hellesoy at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >  I also had to go into specs on a project I'm not working on, and found
>  >  an unholy hive of database-accessing specs. It's disheartening.
>  >  Basically, it's cargo cult development practices - using the "best
>  >  practice" without actually understanding it.
>  >
>
>  What "best practice" are you referring to?
>

I'm also interested in discovering what is this "best practice".

I can't see any problem in specs running against a database, that's
exactly what integration testing is about, shouldn't we do integration
testing just because we're using BDD? I really don't think so.

The big problem about specs running against a database is not knowing
that it's integration testing and also that specs that access
databases run slower than "pure" unit tests, but you can't be sure
that your app works without a bunch of integration tests.

-- 
Maurício Linhares
http://alinhavado.wordpress.com/ (pt-br) |
http://codeshooter.wordpress.com/ (en)
João Pessoa, PB, +55 83 8867-7208


More information about the rspec-users mailing list