On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 3:59 PM, Peter Jaros <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 8:59 AM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 7:30 AM, aslak hellesoy
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> World do
>>> world = Object.new
>>> world.extend(Logging::Logger)
>>> world
>>> end
>>
>> World do
>> returning Cucumber::Rails::World do |world|
>> world.extend(Logging::Logger)
>> end
>> end
>
> It would be really nice to be able to do:
>
> World do |world|
> returning world do |w|
> w.extend(Logging::Logger)
> end
> end
>
> This way steps files could extend the world by adding to a chain,
> agnostic of the nature of the original world object.
>
You *may* want to be in control over the world type (class). For
example, in Rails the world instance is a
ActionController::Integration::Session instance (off the top of my
head) and in vanilla Cucumber it is Object. what if you want to change
that?
Maybe Cucumber could send in a world instance it *thinks* is the one
you want (allowing what you suggest (and allow the user to instantiate
a different class if they want to).
# I'm happy with the suggested type
World do |world|
returning world do |w|
w.extend(Logging::Logger)
end
end
# I want my own type!
World do
world = MyType.new
returning world do |w|
w.extend(Logging::Logger)
end
end
I didn't see a ticket yet, so please add my comment or link to mail
archive for this thread when you create the ticket.
Cheers,
Aslak
> Peter
> _______________________________________________
> 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
