rspec users - Dec 2011 - Expecting multiple changes (chaining)

Hi RSpec list,

I have a question about the "expect { ... }.to change" construct
(https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/docs/built-in-matchers/expect-change):

Is there an idiomatic way to test for multiple changes (i.e. chaining)?

Right now I''m doing

    expect {
      expect {
        foobuzz
      }.to change { a }
    }.to change { b }

to test that calling foobuzz changes a and b. Is there a more compact way?

(Using tap turns out rather ugly: .tap { |proc| proc.to change { a }
}. Not an improvement IMO.)

Thanks,
Jo

-- 
Jo Liss - http://electicvoting.com/
Blog: http://opinionatedprogrammer.com/

On Thu, Dec 8, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Jo Liss <joliss42 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi RSpec list,
>
> I have a question about the "expect { ... }.to change" construct
>
(https://www.relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-expectations/docs/built-in-matchers/expect-change):
>
> Is there an idiomatic way to test for multiple changes (i.e. chaining)?
>
> Right now I''m doing
>
> ? ?expect {
> ? ? ?expect {
> ? ? ? ?foobuzz
> ? ? ?}.to change { a }
> ? ?}.to change { b }
>
> to test that calling foobuzz changes a and b. Is there a more compact way?
If there are two outcomes, then I like to write two examples:

it "changes a" do
  expect { foobuzz }.to change {a}
end

it "changes b" do
  expect { foobuzz }.to change {b}
end

HTH,
David