On 8/16/07, Steve Tooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm that's true.
>
> If the acts_as_list implementation changed, or is removed then this
> isn't going to work. But you don't really want to go down the rabbit
> warren of checking that the whole of the acts_as_list implementation
> works as expe
Hmm that's true.
If the acts_as_list implementation changed, or is removed then this
isn't going to work. But you don't really want to go down the rabbit
warren of checking that the whole of the acts_as_list implementation
works as expected, as presumably that's already tested.
Perhaps I'm just b
On 8/15/07, Steve Tooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How are people specifying models which act_as_list?
>
> I'm thinking that it would be possible to check that acts_as_list
> instance methods have been added to a class using something like this:
You're specing the code not the behavior.
Hi,
How are people specifying models which act_as_list?
I'm thinking that it would be possible to check that acts_as_list
instance methods have been added to a class using something like this:
describe Page, "acts_as_list" do
it "should act as a list" do
Page.ancestors.should be_include(Ac
