On 7/2/07, Ashley Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 27 Jun 2007, at 16:57, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
> > There's an RFE for this in the tracker - wanna contribute this as a
> > patch? If you do, please use "facet" instead of "aspect".
>
>
> I had a quick look at this - didn't get much chance because I had
> work to do too. I had a scan through the specs and code for the
> Behaviour class, but I came a bit unstuck because adding the "facet"
> method doesn't actually add any behaviour. So what goes in the
> specs? Is it enough to test that a spec inside a facet (inside a
> facet?) runs? Or a spec inside a facet (inside a facet?) fails? Or
> should I test that specs get added to the list of those due to run?
IIRC, part of the facet idea was to prepend the facet text to the
descriptive string:
describe XP do
facet "pair programming" do
it "should work better when team members have breath mints" do
end
end
end
XP
- (pair programming) should work better when team members have breath mints
So you could write examples that describe the behaviour's description string.
David
>
> Ashley
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users@rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
