On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Scott Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Jun 1, 2008, at 4:55 PM, David Chelimsky wrote: > >> >> 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. >> > > 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? I spoke up on the code size issue some months ago: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/articles/2008/01/29/why-i-dont-mind-using-rspec-in-fact-ive-come-to-love-it As for whether or not the rspec mocking framework should be separately loadable, that's a separate question. > > > Anyway - I've never found it to be too slow. Has anyone done benchmarks on > it? Like most other things, how slow or fast depends on how you use it. Here at @work, we have a really large rails app with a mixture of legacy tests and new specs. The slowest part of the overall test/spec suite, by far, is the legacy functional tests, which we hope to gradually convert to controller and view specs, using mocking as possible to avoid the db overhead, which is the real culprit. -- Rick DeNatale My blog on Ruby http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
_______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
