On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Mark Wilden <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Matt Wynne <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure if I like this - dependency between steps seems like a dodgy
>> road to go down.
>
> I'm wondering how you'd feel about a style I've adopted:
>
> Scenario: Accepting a direct challenge, without leaving a comment
> Given there is a challenge
> And I am logged in
One thing I do fairly consistently is put "logged in" steps first.
Given I am logged in as "admin"
And there is a challenge
etc
the /as "admin"/ bit creates a user with login names, passwords and
roles derived from the value.
I also only include these when they are meaningful to the scenario. If
I'm working on a bit of functionality that only "admin" (for example)
can access, I'll have a separate feature talking about access, and
leave that business out of scenarios for this functionality. So
something like:
Scenario: valid vacation request
Given I have accrued 10 days vacation
When I submit a vacation request with:
| start | days |
| next monday | 5 |
...
... would take care of logging in for me implicitly, as being logged
in is a fair assumption for this scenario and is spec'd elsewhere.
Any red flags for ppl? Are you doing it this way? If not, how else?
Cheers,
David
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
