On Aug 31, 2008, at 2:58 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Chuck Remes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Scott Taylor wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Remes wrote:
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Chuck Remes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 31, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Scott Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Remes wrote:
>>
>>> I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my search
>>> terms are too generic (spec and req
On Aug 31, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Scott Taylor wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Remes wrote:
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my
search terms are too generic (spec and require...).
I am writing ruby code that runs under jruby in an embedded
environment.
On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Remes wrote:
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my
search terms are too generic (spec and require...).
I am writing ruby code that runs under jruby in an embedded
environment. Periodically I will install new code that passes all
Could you put a mocking expectation on Kernel? (which is where
#require is defined)
Kernel.should_receive(:require).with(expected_file_name)
On 31 Aug 2008, at 15:36, Chuck Remes wrote:
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my
search terms are too generic (spec and re
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my search
terms are too generic (spec and require...).
I am writing ruby code that runs under jruby in an embedded
environment. Periodically I will install new code that passes all
specs only to have it fail when it can't find a ne
