Hi
I was just about to replace a `before` block along the lines of:
before(:each) do
@cti_b_id = service.create(name: "Item-B")
@cti_z_id = service.create(name: "Z-Item")
@cti_a_id = service.create(name: "Item-A")
# ...
end
with
let!(:cti_b_id) { ... }
let!(:cti_z_id) { ... }
let!(:cti_a_id) { ... }
But then I wondered - since the spec depends on the order they are created in
(it proves ordering is independent of creation order) - is the run order of
`let!` guaranteed? I imagine they run in the order I expect (ie top to bottom),
but I wondered if that was an explicitly stated property of RSpec?
Cheers
Ash
--
http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
On Aug 9, 2010, at 7:38 AM, Ashley Moran wrote:> Hi > > I was just about to replace a `before` block along the lines of: > > before(:each) do > @cti_b_id = service.create(name: "Item-B") > @cti_z_id = service.create(name: "Z-Item") > @cti_a_id = service.create(name: "Item-A") > # ... > end > > with > > let!(:cti_b_id) { ... } > let!(:cti_z_id) { ... } > let!(:cti_a_id) { ... } > > But then I wondered - since the spec depends on the order they are created in (it proves ordering is independent of creation order) - is the run order of `let!` guaranteed? I imagine they run in the order I expect (ie top to bottom), but I wondered if that was an explicitly stated property of RSpec?Yes, eval''d in order. No, not explicitly stated, but I think it should be. Want to submit a patch with a spec for this?> > Cheers > Ash > > -- > http://www.patchspace.co.uk/ > http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:49 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:> > On Aug 9, 2010, at 7:38 AM, Ashley Moran wrote: > >> Hi >> >> I was just about to replace a `before` block along the lines of: >> >> ?before(:each) do >> ? ?@cti_b_id = service.create(name: "Item-B") >> ? ?@cti_z_id = service.create(name: "Z-Item") >> ? ?@cti_a_id = service.create(name: "Item-A") >> ? ?# ... >> ?end >> >> with >> >> ? let!(:cti_b_id) { ... } >> ? let!(:cti_z_id) { ... } >> ? let!(:cti_a_id) { ... } >> >> But then I wondered - since the spec depends on the order they are created in (it proves ordering is independent of creation order) - is the run order of `let!` guaranteed? ?I imagine they run in the order I expect (ie top to bottom), but I wondered if that was an explicitly stated property of RSpec? > > Yes, eval''d in order. No, not explicitly stated, but I think it should be. Want to submit a patch with a spec for this?But, First of all, what''s let! as opposed to let, I can''t seem to find it via google or the latest draft of the book. Second, unless let! is a new method which not only defines the memoized method but invokes it, then the order of evaluation will depend on the order the generated let methods are invoked in the example won''t it? -- Rick DeNatale Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ Github: http://github.com/rubyredrick Twitter: @RickDeNatale WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale
On Aug 9, 2010, at 10:06 AM, Rick DeNatale wrote:> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 8:49 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> On Aug 9, 2010, at 7:38 AM, Ashley Moran wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> I was just about to replace a `before` block along the lines of: >>> >>> before(:each) do >>> @cti_b_id = service.create(name: "Item-B") >>> @cti_z_id = service.create(name: "Z-Item") >>> @cti_a_id = service.create(name: "Item-A") >>> # ... >>> end >>> >>> with >>> >>> let!(:cti_b_id) { ... } >>> let!(:cti_z_id) { ... } >>> let!(:cti_a_id) { ... } >>> >>> But then I wondered - since the spec depends on the order they are created in (it proves ordering is independent of creation order) - is the run order of `let!` guaranteed? I imagine they run in the order I expect (ie top to bottom), but I wondered if that was an explicitly stated property of RSpec? >> >> Yes, eval''d in order. No, not explicitly stated, but I think it should be. Want to submit a patch with a spec for this? > > But, > > First of all, what''s let! as opposed to let, I can''t seem to find it > via google or the latest draft of the book.http://rdoc.info/projects/rspec/rspec-core - search for let and let!> > Second, unless let! is a new method which not only defines the > memoized method but invokes itThat''s what it is. Sort of. It gets invoked by an implicit before hook which is added - those get eval''d in the order in which they get defined.> , then the order of evaluation will > depend on the order the generated let methods are invoked in the > example won''t it? > > > -- > Rick DeNatale > > Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ > Github: http://github.com/rubyredrick > Twitter: @RickDeNatale > WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
On 9 Aug 2010, at 13:49, David Chelimsky wrote:> Yes, eval''d in order. No, not explicitly stated, but I think it should be. Want to submit a patch with a spec for this?Sure - I''ve made an action to write a spec for this. I guess the implementation is not likely to change any time soon so I''ll do it when I find a convenient 10 mins... Ash -- http://www.patchspace.co.uk/ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:21 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:>> First of all, what''s let! as opposed to let, I can''t seem to find it >> via google or the latest draft of the book. > > http://rdoc.info/projects/rspec/rspec-core - search for let and let! > >> >> Second, unless let! is a new method which not only defines the >> memoized method but invokes it > > That''s what it is. Sort of. It gets invoked by an implicit before hook which is added - those get eval''d in the order in which they get defined.Makes sense. So is it not (going to be) mentioned in the book, it doesn''t seem to be in Beta 15.0 supposedly the final beta version. -- Rick DeNatale Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ Github: http://github.com/rubyredrick Twitter: @RickDeNatale WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale
On Aug 10, 2010, at 9:08 AM, Rick DeNatale wrote:> On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:21 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote: >>> First of all, what''s let! as opposed to let, I can''t seem to find it >>> via google or the latest draft of the book. >> >> http://rdoc.info/projects/rspec/rspec-core - search for let and let! >> >>> >>> Second, unless let! is a new method which not only defines the >>> memoized method but invokes it >> >> That''s what it is. Sort of. It gets invoked by an implicit before hook which is added - those get eval''d in the order in which they get defined. > > Makes sense. So is it not (going to be) mentioned in the book, it > doesn''t seem to be in Beta 15.0 supposedly the final beta version.Correct. At this point in the production process (indexing) there is no room to add new technical content to the book.> -- > Rick DeNatale > > Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ > Github: http://github.com/rubyredrick > Twitter: @RickDeNatale > WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users