Hi
I can''t get heckle working. In fact, I''ve built an example so
simple
that it either shows a bug, or I am being really, REALLY stupid.
Heckle does not appear to support RSpec directly, so I''m trying to use
spec --heckle (RSpec trunk as of 10 mins ago, Heckle 1.4.1). I''ve
constructed this pair of sample files:
18> ~/Desktop/heckle_test % cat lib/cow.rb
class Cow
def moo
"moo"
end
end
19> ~/Desktop/heckle_test % cat spec/cow_spec.rb
require ''rubygems''
require ''spec''
require File.dirname(__FILE__) + ''/../lib/cow.rb''
describe Cow do
it "should moo when sent :moo" do
cow = Cow.new
# cow.moo.should == "moo"
end
end
So, my thinking is, the spec should pass (nothing in the one example
to make it fail). Then heckle should change "moo" to
"dfhgd5rgvsev"
or some other randomness, then it should expect "Cow should moo when
sent :moo" to *fail*, which of course it won''t, because I
commented
out the line that checks that.
Also, if I manually violate the example, spec proceeds to heckle anyway:
25> ~/Desktop/heckle_test % spec --heckle Cow spec/cow_spec.rb
F
1)
''Cow should moo when sent :moo'' FAILED
./spec/cow_spec.rb:9:
Finished in 0.00767 seconds
1 example, 1 failure
**********************************************************************
*** Cow#moo loaded with 1 possible mutations
**********************************************************************
1 mutations remaining...
No mutants survived. Cool!
What''s going on? None of this is behaviour I expect.
Ashley
--
blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/
linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
currently @ home
On Oct 30, 2007 7:05 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote:> Hi > > I can''t get heckle working. In fact, I''ve built an example so simple > that it either shows a bug, or I am being really, REALLY stupid.Heckle is hosed in trunk. We''ll get it fixed before the release. Of course, that means the release won''t be as soon as we hoped :(
On Oct 31, 2007 6:28 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:> On Oct 30, 2007 7:05 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote: > > Hi > > > > I can''t get heckle working. In fact, I''ve built an example so simple > > that it either shows a bug, or I am being really, REALLY stupid. > > Heckle is hosed in trunk. We''ll get it fixed before the release.Fixed in r2803. http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=15232&group_id=797&atid=3149
El 31/10/2007, a las 15:40, "David Chelimsky" <dchelimsky at gmail.com> escribi?:> On Oct 30, 2007 7:05 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote: >> Hi >> >> I can''t get heckle working. In fact, I''ve built an example so simple >> that it either shows a bug, or I am being really, REALLY stupid. > > Heckle is hosed in trunk. We''ll get it fixed before the release. Of > course, that means the release won''t be as soon as we hoped :(Recently with all of the activity on the story runner front I''ve thought that RSpec could benefit from a slightly more "branched" development process. At the moment it appears that *all* development activity occurs on the trunk, which means that when there are long periods between releases you have no choice but to live with the old version or sit on the bleeding edge. If RSpec had a "development" and "maintenance" branch (or "stable" and "devel"; "master" and "maint"; call them what you will) then it would be easier to contemplate intermediate maintenance releases while working on big new features which take a long time to get "baked in", like the story runner. As an example, consider how the Rails 2.0 preview release came out and the trunk wasn''t really ready to have a release cut from it for compatibility, so people have had to follow the trunk. It would have been nice to be able to cut a 1.0.9 release from a maintenance branch instead. If the suckiness of Subversion''s merge functionality is a problem then RSpec should consider moving to a different SCM, or at least layering one on top of the existing Subversion repo (ie. "the" Subversion repo continues to be the centralized distribution point, but the devs do the "real work" using Git). Cheers, Wincent
On Oct 31, 2007 9:56 AM, Wincent Colaiuta <win at wincent.com> wrote:> El 31/10/2007, a las 15:40, "David Chelimsky" <dchelimsky at gmail.com> > escribi?: > Recently with all of the activity on the story runner front I''ve > thought that RSpec could benefit from a slightly more "branched" > development process. At the moment it appears that *all* development > activity occurs on the trunk, which means that when there are long > periods between releases you have no choice but to live with the old > version or sit on the bleeding edge. > > If RSpec had a "development" and "maintenance" branch (or "stable" and > "devel"; "master" and "maint"; call them what you will) then it would > be easier to contemplate intermediate maintenance releases while > working on big new features which take a long time to get "baked in", > like the story runner. > > As an example, consider how the Rails 2.0 preview release came out and > the trunk wasn''t really ready to have a release cut from it for > compatibility, so people have had to follow the trunk. It would have > been nice to be able to cut a 1.0.9 release from a maintenance branch > instead. > > If the suckiness of Subversion''s merge functionality is a problem then > RSpec should consider moving to a different SCM, or at least layering > one on top of the existing Subversion repo (ie. "the" Subversion repo > continues to be the centralized distribution point, but the devs do > the "real work" using Git).Please start new conversations with a new subject. This is unrelated to the heckle problem and deserves a thread of its own. I responded (in a new thread) on the rspec-devel list, which is the appropriate home for discussions about dev process: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-devel/2007-October/004194.html Cheers, David
On Oct 31, 2007, at 7:28 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:> On Oct 30, 2007 7:05 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote: >> Hi >> >> I can''t get heckle working. In fact, I''ve built an example so simple >> that it either shows a bug, or I am being really, REALLY stupid. > > Heckle is hosed in trunk. We''ll get it fixed before the release. Of > course, that means the release won''t be as soon as we hoped :( > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-usersWhen can we expect the next release of rspec? Scott
On Oct 31, 2007, at 12:15 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:> Fixed in r2803.Excellent, thanks! However it still runs heckle even if the specs fail (and then assumes that the heckling is successful, because of the failing spec). Also I notice that, as long as the specs pass, the return code for the spec command is 0, even if heckling finds an unspecced path. Are these issues easy to solve? Should I file tickets for them? Ashley -- blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/ linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran currently @ home
On Oct 31, 2007, at 4:36 pm, Scott Taylor wrote:> When can we expect the next release of rspec?You wait for *releases*? :) -- blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/ linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran currently @ home
On Oct 31, 2007 1:50 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote:> > On Oct 31, 2007, at 12:15 pm, David Chelimsky wrote: > > > Fixed in r2803. > > Excellent, thanks! However it still runs heckle even if the specs > fail (and then assumes that the heckling is successful, because of the > failing spec). > > Also I notice that, as long as the specs pass, the return code for the > spec command is 0, even if heckling finds an unspecced path. > > Are these issues easy to solve? Should I file tickets for them?Tickets would be awesome. Please reference the revision number you''re working from. Thanks Ashley. Cheers, David
On Oct 31, 2007, at 2:50 PM, Ashley Moran wrote:> > On Oct 31, 2007, at 4:36 pm, Scott Taylor wrote: > >> When can we expect the next release of rspec? > > You wait for *releases*? :)No, we are running on trunk, but have had a number of frustrating days. I''m the one who advocates rspec, and when running on trunk starts bothering my co-workers, it makes me look bad. I''d like to get to a stable version, but currently I''m using mock_model with :null_object => true, which is only on trunk. Moving to 1.0.8 would break those specs. Scott
On Oct 31, 2007, at 6:53 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:> Tickets would be awesome. Please reference the revision number you''re > working from.Sure thing - they''ve gone up as two separate issues So by the time RSpec 1.2 comes out, and specs, stories, rcov and heckle are all working seamlessly, there''s nothing to stop me writing perfect code... right? Cheers Ashley -- blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/ linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran currently @ home
On Oct 31, 2007 3:48 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote:> > On Oct 31, 2007, at 6:53 pm, David Chelimsky wrote: > > > Tickets would be awesome. Please reference the revision number you''re > > working from. > > Sure thing - they''ve gone up as two separate issues > > So by the time RSpec 1.2 comes out, and specs, stories, rcov and > heckle are all working seamlessly, there''s nothing to stop me writing > perfect code... right?If you think having the right tools will make you right perfect code ...
On Oct 31, 2007, at 6:58 pm, Scott Taylor wrote:> No, we are running on trunk, but have had a number of frustrating > days. I''m the one who advocates rspec, and when running on trunk > starts bothering my co-workers, it makes me look bad.Ah, I know where you are coming from. Shame no-one else there is bitten yet, it''s hard being the sole advocate for something. They must either not see the benefits, or not care. I hope it''s the former.> I''d like to get to a stable version, but currently I''m using > mock_model > with :null_object => true, which is only on trunk. Moving to 1.0.8 > would break those specs.Kinda assumes RSpec will stabilise some time soon? For me, there''s too much good stuff going in to use the last release. Will there ever be a stage where RSpec is "complete"? Ashley -- blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/ linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran currently @ home
On Oct 31, 2007 3:56 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote:> > On Oct 31, 2007, at 6:58 pm, Scott Taylor wrote: > > > No, we are running on trunk, but have had a number of frustrating > > days. I''m the one who advocates rspec, and when running on trunk > > starts bothering my co-workers, it makes me look bad. > > Ah, I know where you are coming from. Shame no-one else there is > bitten yet, it''s hard being the sole advocate for something. They > must either not see the benefits, or not care. I hope it''s the former. > > > > I''d like to get to a stable version, but currently I''m using > > mock_model > > with :null_object => true, which is only on trunk. Moving to 1.0.8 > > would break those specs. > > Kinda assumes RSpec will stabilise some time soon? For me, there''s > too much good stuff going in to use the last release. Will there ever > be a stage where RSpec is "complete"?Hopefully not :) But we do plan to position ourselves to release more frequently than this recent gap. Cheers, David
On Oct 31, 2007, at 8:52 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:> If you think having the right tools will make you right perfect > code ...Nope, they won''t *make* me... but if I''m trying, and the tools both facilitate the effort and tell me when I mess up, surely that goes a very long way? I mean, I could write perfect code with nothing but ruby and nano, but I''d have to be some kind of supergenius. I just want something to make up for the fact I''m human. It''s like leaving things you need to take to work next to your car keys. -- blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/ linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran currently @ home
On Oct 31, 2007 4:20 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote:> It''s like leaving things you need to take to work next to your car keys.If only I could remember where I put the damned car keys!
You too! On Oct 31, 2007, at 2:25 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:> On Oct 31, 2007 4:20 PM, Ashley Moran <work at ashleymoran.me.uk> wrote: >> It''s like leaving things you need to take to work next to your car >> keys. > > If only I could remember where I put the damned car keys! > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users