On 10/18/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/18/07, Pat Maddox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 10/18/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 10/18/07, Wincent Colaiuta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > El 18/10/2007, a las 10:33, "David Chelimsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > > Take a look at examples/story/calculator.rb to see what's going on.
> > > > >
> > > > > Needs docs!!!!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts welcome.
> > > >
> > > > Could this:
> > > >
> > > > step_matcher(:given, "an addend of $addend") do |addend|
> > > > @adder ||= Adder.new
> > > > @adder << addend.to_i
> > > > end
> > > >
> > > > step_matcher(:when, "they are added") do
> > > > @sum = @adder.sum
> > > > end
> > > >
> > > > step_matcher(:then, "the sum should be $sum") do |sum|
> > > > @sum.should == sum.to_i
> > > > end
> > > >
> > > > Be refactored to this?
> > > >
> > > > given_matcher("an addend of $addend") do |addend|
> > > > @adder ||= Adder.new
> > > > @adder << addend.to_i
> > > > end
> > > >
> > > > when_matcher("they are added") do
> > > > @sum = @adder.sum
> > > > end
> > > >
> > > > then_matcher("the sum should be $sum") do |sum|
> > > > @sum.should == sum.to_i
> > > > end
> > > >
> > > > I'd find that a little bit easier to type; what do you think?
> > >
> > > Easier to type, sure. I'm not in love w/ the names yet though because
> > > they sound like verb phrases - "given matcher", "when matcher", "then
> > > matcher".
> > >
> > > How about something like match_given, match_when, match_then?
> >
> > I see what you're saying. However I think it's helpful to put the
> > g/w/t right at the beginning of the method name, it's easier to
> > distinguish between them. You can look at the first character and
> > know what's going on. With step_matcher(:given...) you have to skip
> > the first 12 characters. That feels noisy and dirty to me, and I
> > think the readability overcomes the verb phrase problem.
> >
> > Though I agree with you and I'm not in love with given_matcher. hrm,
> > needs more thought.
>
> What if it were wrapped in something like this:
>
> step_matchers do
> given_matcher("an addend of $addend") do |addend|
> @adder ||= Adder.new
> @adder << addend.to_i
> end
>
> when_matcher("they are added") do
> @sum = @adder.sum
> end
>
> then_matcher("the sum should be $sum") do |sum|
> @sum.should == sum.to_i
> end
> end
>
> step_matchers provides context for the [given|when|then]_matcher methods.
> WDYT?
I like that more. It also provides a natural insertion point for
naming libraries.
step_matchers("arithmetic") do
given_matcher("an addend of $addend") do |addend|
@adder ||= Adder.new
@adder << addend.to_i
end
when_matcher("they are added") do
@sum = @adder.sum
end
then_matcher("the sum should be $sum") do |sum|
@sum.should == sum.to_i
end
end
That allows you to do something like
Story: Adding numbers
uses arithmetic vocabulary
...
or something along those lines.
Pat
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
