On Jun 1, 2008, at 4:55 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Jun 1, 2008, at 12:17 PM, Matthias Hennemeyer wrote:
Hey!
I have implemented a quick solution for the should != .. , should !
~ ... 'problem'.
It uses source code inspection (I think it's the only way) and i've
done some
benchmarking to see if it's really that slow.
A direct comparison of
running '1.should == 1'
with the unmodified rspec source against the rspec-version with
source inspect
shows that the latter is 7 times slower ... :(
But benchmarks with '1.should == 1' inside a real example file are
showing 'only'
an overall speed decrease of 15% to 50%. That is still bad but
having lots of people
consider the passing of '1.should != 1' an rspec bug is bad too.
RSpec is already getting dinged for being slower than test/unit.
Making it run any slower than it already does is a deal breaker for
me.
Maybe using autoloading instead of requiring would help the situation?
It seems perfectly reasonable that rspec is bigger than test/unit:
Test::Unit doesn't have a mocking framework, and so on. On the other
hand, if no one uses (rspec's) mocking framework, should rspec have
the code in place anyway?
Anyway - I've never found it to be too slow. Has anyone done
benchmarks on it?
Scott
Here is the benchmarking script:
http://pastie.caboo.se/206853
And the code is at branch 'inspect' in:
git://github.com/mhennemeyer/rspec
There are examples for should and should_not != and !~ and i will
definitely work on performance if you not totally reject this whole
idea.
If you can get the performance up to or better than current, I'm all
for it.
Cheers,
David
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
