[rspec-users] respond_to? check in rspec-mocks

David Chelimsky dchelimsky at gmail.com
Sun Aug 29 18:51:19 EDT 2010

On Aug 29, 2010, at 1:30 AM, Myron Marston wrote:

>> I think "separate from the spec run" mislead you as to my intention here.
>> What I mean is that I don't want this to raise errors, but rather it
>> would be part of the output, just like pending and failed examples.
> I'm OK with this idea.  I just didn't want to have a separate file to
> read :).
>> I was resistant to the idea when it was simpler, but this additional
>> complexity makes me even moreso :)
> Fair enough.
>> Without getting into a debate about its relative merits, here's what
>> I'd really like to see: an API in the rspec-mocks framework that would
>> allow you to extend it to do all this in a separate gem. Then you
>> could build this, release it, refine it, etc.
>> What do you think would be necessary in rspec-mocks to support that?
> I appreciate your willingness to make changes to RSpec to support 3rd
> party libraries...but I honestly think that the necessary changes to
> rspec-mocks for the API plus the separate gem would be far more work
> than just implementing a simple version of this (as you've suggested)
> in rspec mocks itself.  Plus I doubt that a separate gem that did this
> one simple thing would get much use by other developers.
> Now that I understand that you just meant to have this print out a
> report as part of the main spec output, I'm completely satisfied with
> your suggestion.  I'll start working on something in a branch and I'll
> see what I can come up with.

Cool. Thanks.


More information about the rspec-users mailing list