On Aug 4, 2010, at 3:43 AM, Ashley Moran wrote:
>
> On 4 Aug 2010, at 1:05 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>>
>
>
> One other thought I've had is keyword syntax. While currently I'm writing:
>
> it_satisfies_contract "[Entity] Collection:", :children, :child, Child.name
>
> I prefer keyword arguments, so I'd like to write:
>
> it_satisfies_contract "[Entity] Collection:",
> :children,
> item_name: "child",
> class_name: Child.name
>
> Currently that would mean rewriting the contract like this:
>
> contract "[Entity] Collection:" do |collection_name, options|
>
> # ...
>
> describe "#{collection_name}" do
> describe "Helper methods:" do
> describe "#new_#{options[:item_name]}, #get_#{options[:item_name]}" do
>
> # ...
>
> WDYT about RSpec automatically translating keyword options to methods?
What happens if the shared spec author really wants it to just be a hash? Do
you think that's a valid use case?
> They'd need to be defined as singleton class methods and instance methods to
> have the same availability as block parameters.
>
> Ash
>
> --
> 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
