[rspec-users] HTML Story Formatter

Joseph Wilk lists at ruby-forum.com
Tue Jul 29 15:28:32 EDT 2008


> Ahh, good to know.  Does that mean that the HTML isn't outputted until
> all of the scenario's are ran for a particular story?

Exactly. It made the html much nicer but did loose that per scenario 
output. I added a progress bar formatter so I could still get that 
direct scenario feedback, be it just a green dot or red F :)

David are you happy with this html and dev-html formatter direction? If 
so I'll move this issue to lighthouse and start adding my patch.



Ben Mabey wrote:
> Joseph Wilk wrote:
>>> Which brings up the other question.. how do we want to handle the JS?
>>> Due to how the HTML is written out JS is required to change the Story's
>>> and Scenario's styles when a step fails or is pending.  I did this with
>>> lowpro for the rspec-story-tmbundle:
>>>     
>>
>> The current html formatter in trunk no longer requires js to apply 
>> styles for failure or pending.
>>   
> 
> Ahh, good to know.  Does that mean that the HTML isn't outputted until
> all of the scenario's are ran for a particular story?
>> So that moves us along to looking at js to hide/show the backtrace.
>>
>> The idea of showing the backtrace in the html has been something I've 
>> been debating for a while. I did come to conclusion that as a developer 
>> I have the build log (or terminal stories are run from) as a source for 
>> story errors. Hence I felt I was best left leaving my stories clean for 
>> the non-developer users of the stories.
>>   
> 
> This is true for regular development, although having the backtrace can
> also be helpful in the HTML version if you use that as your main
> formatter (i.e. in textmate.)
> The real use for the backtrace, IMO, is for providing a decent build
> artifact for CI.  Otherwise you could have to look through your test.log
> file and try to match it up.. which would be no fun.
>>
>> AND
>> advanced/verbose output (profiling each story aswell perhaps?). 
>> Potentially Aslak's new interface could move to this dev-formatter(or 
>> some other formatter) so that we continue development without disturbing 
>> those using the simple default output.
>>
>> What do people think?
>>   
> 
> I really like that idea, and I agree with you that these two would cover
> most use cases.
> 
> -Ben

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.


More information about the rspec-users mailing list