Re: [rspec-users] Cucumber - Recommended viewing.

aslak hellesoy wrote: On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Ben Mabey > wrote: Matt Wynne wrote: On 11 Apr 2009, at 01:07, James Byrne wrote: http://mwrc2009.confreaks.com/14-mar-2009-15-00-bdd-with-cucumber-ben-mabey.html Great job

Re: [rspec-users] Cucumber - Recommended viewing.

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Ben Mabey wrote: > Matt Wynne wrote: > >> >> On 11 Apr 2009, at 01:07, James Byrne wrote: >> >> >>> http://mwrc2009.confreaks.com/14-mar-2009-15-00-bdd-with-cucumber-ben-mabey.html >>> >> >> Great job with the talk Ben, it's a really good intro to Cucumber and I >

Re: [rspec-users] Mocking: brittle specs and tight coupling?

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Phlip wrote: > My current day-job's most important project has a test suite that suffered > from abuse of that concept. The original team, without enough refactoring Would you have called it abuse were the tests well-factored? I don't think it was abuse of accep

Re: [rspec-users] Mocking: brittle specs and tight coupling?

Zach Dennis wrote: My current day-job's most important project has a test suite that suffered from abuse of that concept. The original team, without enough refactoring, were cloning and modifying very-high-level tests, making them longer, and using them to TDD new features into the bottom of the

Re: [rspec-users] Spec run heuristics (Re: Cucover: coverage-aware 'lazy' cucumber runs)

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Steve Molitor wrote: > Regarding the exception nagger,  would a simple script that grepped the log > file for exceptions and produced a list of failing lines in your code be a > start? Hi Steve, I think so. If it said which class-or-module and method they were d

Re: [rspec-users] Mocking: brittle specs and tight coupling?

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 8:23 PM, Phlip wrote: > David Chelimsky wrote: > >>> Another tip: To TDD a new feature, don't clone a high-level test which >>> calls >>> code which calls code which calls the code you need to change. >> >> FWIW, what you propose is the exact opposite of BDD, which suggests

Re: [rspec-users] Mocking: brittle specs and tight coupling?

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Phlip wrote: > David Chelimsky wrote: > >>> Another tip: To TDD a new feature, don't clone a high-level test which >>> calls >>> code which calls code which calls the code you need to change. >> >> FWIW, what you propose is the exact opposite of BDD, which suggests

Re: [rspec-users] Custom matcher, use other helpers and matchers from rspec-rails

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Brandon Olivares wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: rspec-users-boun...@rubyforge.org [mailto:rspec-users- >> boun...@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of David Chelimsky >> Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 9:27 PM >> To: rspec-users >> Subject: Re: [rspec-users

Re: [rspec-users] Custom matcher, use other helpers and matchers from rspec-rails

> -Original Message- > From: rspec-users-boun...@rubyforge.org [mailto:rspec-users- > boun...@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of David Chelimsky > Sent: Sunday, April 12, 2009 9:27 PM > To: rspec-users > Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Custom matcher, use other helpers and > matchers from rspec-rails

Re: [rspec-users] Custom matcher, use other helpers and matchers from rspec-rails

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 10:15 PM, Brandon Olivares wrote: > Hi, > > I am creating an improved version of route_for that is more intuitive to me. > However, I keep getting NoMethodError exceptions, so am trying to find all > the includes I have to put into my class. > > What's the best way to impor

[rspec-users] Custom matcher, use other helpers and matchers from rspec-rails

Hi, I am creating an improved version of route_for that is more intuitive to me. However, I keep getting NoMethodError exceptions, so am trying to find all the includes I have to put into my class. What's the best way to import the necessary classes to use rspec-rails assertions and helpers? Bra

Re: [rspec-users] Mocking: brittle specs and tight coupling?

David Chelimsky wrote: Another tip: To TDD a new feature, don't clone a high-level test which calls code which calls code which calls the code you need to change. FWIW, what you propose is the exact opposite of BDD, which suggests we start at the highest levels and work our way in. My curren

Re: [rspec-users] Spec run heuristics (Re: Cucover: coverage-aware 'lazy' cucumber runs)

Stephen, Regarding the exception nagger, would a simple script that grepped the log file for exceptions and produced a list of failing lines in your code be a start? Steve On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:47 PM, Stephen Eley wrote: > On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Ashley Moran > wrote: > > > > I

Re: [rspec-users] Spec run heuristics (Re: Cucover: coverage-aware 'lazy' cucumber runs)

Stephen Eley wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Ashley Moran wrote: I was just idly thinking, could a code-coverage based system could be combined with some sort of failure (fragility) history to balance the time cost of heavy feature runs with the benefits of having something run end-t

Re: [rspec-users] [cucumber] Cucumber and restful_authentication

David Chelimsky wrote: On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Tadatoshi Takahashi wrote: David Chelimsky wrote: On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Tadatoshi Takahashi wrote: what to do. �User.create!( :first_name => 'quire', map.login '/login', :controller => 'sessions', :action => 'n

Re: [rspec-users] Cucumber - Recommended viewing.

Matt Wynne wrote: On 12 Apr 2009, at 16:35, Ben Mabey wrote: Matt Wynne wrote: On 11 Apr 2009, at 01:07, James Byrne wrote: http://mwrc2009.confreaks.com/14-mar-2009-15-00-bdd-with-cucumber-ben-mabey.html Great job with the talk Ben, it's a really good intro to Cucumber and I will be p

Re: [rspec-users] [cucumber] Cucumber and restful_authentication

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 8:04 PM, Tadatoshi Takahashi wrote: > David Chelimsky wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Tadatoshi Takahashi >> wrote: >>> what to do. >>> �User.create!( :first_name => 'quire', >>> >>> map.login '/login', :controller => 'sessions', :action => 'new' >>> >>> Without

Re: [rspec-users] Mocking: brittle specs and tight coupling?

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 12:32 PM, Phlip wrote: >> The third alternative is you never _need_ to mock, yet both your tests and >> target code are highly decoupled. _That_ is the goal. > > Another tip: To TDD a new feature, don't clone a high-level test which calls > code which calls code which calls

Re: [rspec-users] [rspec] How to Spec a Web Services Client

Thanks. I think instead of a server, I'll need to dive into replacing the results of XmlRpc::Client#call unless there's some ultra-cool way I haven't thought of. Steve On Apr 12, 2009, at 1:03 PM, Stephen Eley wrote: On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 3:24 PM, s.ross wrote: I put a pastie out at htt

Re: [rspec-users] How to Spec a Web Services Client

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Stephen Eley wrote: > > I just had the same challenge with a SOAP client I'm building that > hits a fairly complicated service.  My solution was to generate a > dummy SOAP server that accepts the right calls and returns the right > kinds of dummy answers. Oh -- I

Re: [rspec-users] How to Spec a Web Services Client

On Sun, Apr 12, 2009 at 3:24 PM, s.ross wrote: > I put a pastie out at http://pastie.org/24, which is an implementation > (short) of an XML-RPC client. I'm getting wrapped around an axle trying to > figure out how to spec this without actually hitting the remote server. I just had the same ch

[rspec-users] How to Spec a Web Services Client

I put a pastie out at http://pastie.org/24, which is an implementation (short) of an XML-RPC client. I'm getting wrapped around an axle trying to figure out how to spec this without actually hitting the remote server. Is the best way to do this stubbing out the xml-rpc :call method to

Re: [rspec-users] Cucover: coverage-aware 'lazy' cucumber runs

On 10 Apr 2009, at 23:40, Ashley Moran wrote: On 10 Apr 2009, at 19:39, Matt Wynne wrote: It's feasible I think, and something I'd definitely like to add for my own purposes eventually. I think RCov works with JRuby too, though I've not tried it myself. Hmmm - the JRuby process is just ru

Re: [rspec-users] Cucumber - Recommended viewing.

On 12 Apr 2009, at 16:35, Ben Mabey wrote: Matt Wynne wrote: On 11 Apr 2009, at 01:07, James Byrne wrote: http://mwrc2009.confreaks.com/14-mar-2009-15-00-bdd-with-cucumber-ben-mabey.html Great job with the talk Ben, it's a really good intro to Cucumber and I will be pointing anyone who

Re: [rspec-users] Cucumber - Recommended viewing.

Matt Wynne wrote: On 11 Apr 2009, at 01:07, James Byrne wrote: http://mwrc2009.confreaks.com/14-mar-2009-15-00-bdd-with-cucumber-ben-mabey.html Great job with the talk Ben, it's a really good intro to Cucumber and I will be pointing anyone who asks towards it. One question about the kitt

Re: [rspec-users] Mocking: brittle specs and tight coupling?

The third alternative is you never _need_ to mock, yet both your tests and target code are highly decoupled. _That_ is the goal. Another tip: To TDD a new feature, don't clone a high-level test which calls code which calls code which calls the code you need to change. Start by cloning the low

Re: [rspec-users] Cucumber - Recommended viewing.

On 11 Apr 2009, at 01:07, James Byrne wrote: http://mwrc2009.confreaks.com/14-mar-2009-15-00-bdd-with-cucumber-ben-mabey.html Great job with the talk Ben, it's a really good intro to Cucumber and I will be pointing anyone who asks towards it. One question about the kitten-killing. I was s