On Aug 3, 2010, at 4:35 PM, Ashley Moran wrote:
>
> On 3 Aug 2010, at 12:50 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>> Pushed:
>>
>> http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/commit/84303616be1ac2f8126675488947b47f6945cebe
>> http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/commit/3cea7b8bea51766d632e20bcc9ef15c64b719ea1
>
> Awesomeness!
>
>
>> Please do let me know if this works with what you've got.
>
> In general, yes, this is a massive improvement! I've realised some things
> that never occurred to me before, though. Maybe you have some thoughts...
>
> I've put everything on a Gist[1] (which needs a few tweaks here and there,
> but I think it's a reasonably example). Notes:
>
> * DomainLib is my holding module for everything I've extracted out of the
> project source. Anything inside that is generic, analogous to eg
> ActiveRecord (eg Entity <-> AR::Base)
>
> * I've only pasted the specs, and only the contract-based ones at that (the
> implementation is not very interesting, nor is the interaction spec).
>
> * I don't like the word contract any more, at least not here. It needs a
> better name, probably something that would fit if you wrote a similar spec
> for ActiveRecord's has_many.
I actually like contract a lot. Maybe we'll need alias_shared_examples_for_to :)
> Some things I ran into:
>
> First, I found that you can't use the block variables in local helper
> methods. Because Ruby methods aren't closures, I've had to replace methods
> like:
>
> def entity_dot_new_collection_member(*args)
> entity.send(:"new_#{item_name}", *args)
> end
>
> with:
>
> define_method :entity_dot_new_collection_member do |*args|
> entity.send(:"new_#{item_name}", *args)
> end
>
> Not a big deal, but it's not as readable as it was before. (Not that it was
> exactly large-print Winnie the Pooh to start with, given the abstract nature
> of the shared examples.)
This is just Ruby. It bugged me for a while too, but mostly because I kept
forgetting. Now I'm completely accustomed to it and def and define_method seem
quite the same to me.
> Second, you can't refer to `described_class` in the descriptions. I don't
> know why I though you'd be able to, but it would be nice if it worked :)
> (You can see the place where my failed attempt was, where I left
> <described_class>.)
This was a mis-alignment between names in the group and its examples
(example_group.describes == example.described_class), but is now fixed (you can
refer to described_class in both cases):
http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/commit/b236a8d8927da108097fed7982d1450e4701939d
> Finally, I realised something when I added another example. I should say
> though, that all this time, I was only using the shared examples with one
> collection on the entity, and I added another a few minutes ago just for fun,
> and it just worked... I like :) But it raised a point about things that are
> common to all shared examples, and parameters to individual uses. In my
> example case, `entity_class` and `entity` are relevant to both of the
> "collection" shared example groups, but `collection_name`, `item_name`,
> `class_name` are parameters to the shared examples individually.
>
> With the current setup, there's no way to require that a host group provides
> eg `entity_class`.
shared_examples_for "foo" do
raise "gotta define entity_class" unless
public_instance_methods.map{|m|m.to_s).include?("entity_class")
end
> And also, if it's defined as a `let` in the host, you can't use it in the
> descriptions in the shared example group (which you couldn't before, of
> course).
Right - the only thing available to descriptions is going to be the params you
pass in.
> So I think this solves 90% of the problems I had before, and is certainly a
> workable solution to the specs I'm trying to write. I'd love to hear your
> thoughts on the rest though.
>
>
>> The issue of the evaluation order is still up for grabs, but this now
>> supports params to shared groups in Ruby >= 1.8.7.
>
> Well, I deliberately didn't check what order you ended up using! Whatever it
> is works for me now, although I guess future experiments could change that...
Thanks for all the feedback!
Cheers,
David
>
>
> Cheers!
> Ash
>
>
> [1] http://gist.github.com/507140
>
>
> --
> http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
