I'm sure this has been covered before, but after some time all I've been able
to find on the intarwebs are references to the use of code coverage tests to
identify code that is not used by any current tests.
I guess the assumption is that you've specced your application completely, and
any code
On 19/02/2009, at 14:05 , David Chelimsky wrote:
Why not start w/ RSpec but do it right?
I made the mistake of showing the guy a spec from a previous project
and narrating (not showing) how the code was built from the spec. So
the manager didn't realise that the spec was built one line at
On 19/02/2009, at 13:02 , Zach Dennis wrote:
I have never seen or heard of anyone who writes a spec (developer
level RSpec spec), but not the code and then hands it over to someone
else and demands that that person implements it.
The fun begins when you can point out two or three conflicting
On 19/02/2009, at 11:39 , Fernando Perez wrote:
What's the point in testing validates_presence_of for a model? It's
already tested in the framework, and so readable that a quick glance
on
the model says it all.
Some people want the spec to stand as a contract, so you can then hand
the spe
On 15/01/2009, at 10:31 , aslak hellesoy wrote:
So I'm starring in a childrens' book with a cuke.
Watch out!
That cucumber is a Perl evangelist!
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-use
On 14/01/2009, at 09:17 , Zach Dennis wrote:
The only recommendation I have is for people to not remove the portion
of the email they are responding to, and to keep their response close
in approximation to what they are responding to.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally
On 05/11/2008, at 01:37 , Steven Baker wrote:
Big difference between "haven't been able to" and "wouldn't learn
the tools". Ashley's post below sums it up best. This is a problem
that's seen regularly when working with new ideas. How many times
have you seen Agile blamed when a project f
On 07/08/2008, at 05:04 , Jonathan Linowes wrote:
.should be_bag_of( [1, 3, 1, 4, 2] )
FWIW, I am in favour of this naming. Now back to lurking :)
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-user
On 08/07/2008, at 04:25 , yitzhakbg wrote:
Just had a discussion with a prospective employer, a Ruby On Rails
shop. His
reaction to BDD development on every project was skeptical, saying
something
like: "It depends on the project". "Some jobs are so short that the
extra
time invested in de
On 03/04/2008, at 10:09 , Tim Haines wrote:
> For now I can add response.code.should == "200" or something similar..
The page returned by Rails to provide you with the stack trace and
stuff? That is a valid HTML page, and it comes along with a HTTP 200
OK response.
What you need to do is loo
On 25/02/2008, at 11:42 , David Chelimsky wrote:
> Steve - it's because of isolation - I pointed Alex to the docs.
Yup, I'm having a low-caffeine day apparently. I'm going to great
pains to isolate just the portions of the controller that need to be
designed (using mocks and stubs), then slap
On 25/02/2008, at 10:58 , David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Alex Satrapa
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In the ResourceController spec, I have the following happening:
>> post( :create, :resource => request_attrs )
>> response
In a story, I have the following happening:
post("/resources/", 'resource' => request_attrs)
response.should render_template('resource/new')
response.should have_tag('*', /must have one or more X defined/)
In the ResourceController spec, I have the following happening:
post( :c
On 12/02/2008, at 14:07 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> A sneak preview of what I've been doing with my patch that made it
> into rspec 1.1.3:
>http://chmeee.dyndns.org/ruby/R-Spec%20Demo.avi
What format is that video? I've got DivX and various others loaded,
but none of them want to work on t
On 19/01/2008, at 05:27 , Mark Wilden wrote:
> What's weird is that I've been using the same email address since
> 1996, I've
> turned off spam filtering by my ISP, and yet I get very, very
> little spam
> these days (maybe 1-2/day).
I've been using the same address since 1994, and every time
On 19/01/2008, at 17:36 , David Chelimsky wrote:
> When you say 5 == 3, what that is really saying is 5.==(3), which is
> how we're able to support 5.should == 3 (becomes 5.should.==(3)).
Would it be true to say that the reason "5.should != 3" won't work is
that somewhere inside Ruby the x != y
16 matches
Mail list logo
