Pat Maddox wrote:
I dunno. Zach's original attempt hardly "sucks".
That was David Chelimsky's attempt - Zach seconded it. But I was replying to
myself.
More important, the tie-breaker here is very simple:
When the assertion fails, can it
tell you exactly how to fix things?
That me
On Mar 15, 2009, at 10:33 AM, Zach Dennis wrote:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Phlip wrote:
response.body.should be_html_with{
form :action => '/users' do
fieldset do
legend 'Personal Information'
label 'First name'
input :type => 'text', :name => 'user[
Zach Dennis wrote:
I didn't have the expectation that they were peers of each other, just
that they both existed somewhere in a fieldset tag. Any helper or
matchers used for spec'ing views should be as liberal as possible
while still communicating enough about the semantics of the page for
the e
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Phlip wrote:
>>> response.body.should be_html_with{
>>> form :action => '/users' do
>>> fieldset do
>>> legend 'Personal Information'
>>> label 'First name'
>>> input :type => 'text', :name => 'user[first_name]'
>>> end
>>>
response.body.should be_html_with{
form :action => '/users' do
fieldset do
legend 'Personal Information'
label 'First name'
input :type => 'text', :name => 'user[first_name]'
end
end
}
Has anyone tried this? is it useful?
That assertion
I haven't tried it yet, but it does seem very useful. The project I'm
focused on right now is all json all the time, so I don't personally
have a real world case for this at the moment. Anybody doing an app w/
html views willing to try this out?
I put it into my current project today (as a >coug
Pat Nakajima wrote:
Has anyone tried this? is it useful?
It looks interesting, though it could be confused for trying to exactly
mimic the actual markup, not just specify interesting parts.
It only specifies interesting parts. The gist writeup explained that, for
example, it skipped ov
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 6:49 PM, Pat Nakajima wrote:
>> Has anyone tried this? is it useful?
>
> It looks interesting, though it could be confused for trying to exactly
> mimic the actual markup, not just specify interesting parts.
What is the method name was be_html_including instead of be_html_w
>
> Has anyone tried this? is it useful?
>
It looks interesting, though it could be confused for trying to exactly
mimic the actual markup, not just specify interesting parts.
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Phlip wrote:
> http://gist.github.com/76136
>>
>
> response.body.should be_html_wit
On Mon, Mar 9, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Phlip wrote:
>> http://gist.github.com/76136
>
>> response.body.should be_html_with{
>> form :action => '/users' do
>> fieldset do
>> legend 'Personal Information'
>> label 'First name'
>> input :type => 'text', :name => 'us
http://gist.github.com/76136
response.body.should be_html_with{
form :action => '/users' do
fieldset do
legend 'Personal Information'
label 'First name'
input :type => 'text', :name => 'user[first_name]'
end
end
}
Has anyone tr
Zach Dennis wrote:
>> response.body.should be_xml_with do
>> form :action => '/users' do
>>fieldset do
>> legend "Personal Information"
>> label "First name"
>> input :type => 'text', :name => 'user[first_name]'
>>end
>> end
>> end
> I like this a lot.
Boom: http://gist
12 matches
Mail list logo
