rspec users - Dec 2007 - RSpec on Ruby 1.9: before(:all) (Not Yet Implemented) pending messages instead of tests

On Dec 27, 2007 3:18 PM, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) <shot at hot.pl>
wrote:
> Shot (Piotr Szotkowski):
>
> > I happily hand-compiled Ruby 1.9.0-0 into /home/shot/opt/ruby today
> > and I''m running into a strange error with RSpec ? all my
examples work
> > perfectly with Ruby 1.8 but are considered peding on Ruby 1.9.
>
> FWIW, I get the same result with this simplest spec:
>
> describe Array do
>   it ''should work'' do
>     a = [1, 2]
>     a.first.should == 1
>   end
> end
>
> RSpec 1.1.1 on Ruby 1.8 ? 1 example, 0 failures.
> RSpec 1.1.1 on Ruby 1.9 ? 1 example, 0 failures, 1 pending.
>
You should probably bring this up on the rspec-users list (I''m copying
this reply there).

This is most likely either:

1) A bug in Ruby 1.9 - At least one bug was reported just before the
1.9.0 release which related to using module_eval inside a method.
I''ve looked at the RSpec code and it''s using instance_eval
inside a
method, so there might be a related bug.  I tried to come up with a
simplified program which evidenced a failure, but couldn''t, but I
didn''t try all that hard.

2) RSpec running into a subtle 1.9 incompatible language change.  I
didn''t see anything obvious, but that''s not to say
it''s not there.


-- 
Rick DeNatale

My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/

On Dec 27, 2007 4:28 PM, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) <shot at hot.pl>
wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I happily hand-compiled Ruby 1.9.0-0 into /home/shot/opt/ruby today
> and I''m running into a strange error with RSpec ? all my examples
work
> perfectly with Ruby 1.8 but are considered peding on Ruby 1.9.
<snip/>
> Pending:
> ArtDecomp::Architecture before(:all) (Not Yet Implemented)
> ArtDecomp::Architecture before(:all) (Not Yet Implemented)
> ArtDecomp::Architecture before(:all) (Not Yet Implemented)
>
> Finished in 0.012114249 seconds
>
> 3 examples, 0 failures, 3 pending
>
> How can I bugtrack/fix this?
RSpec''s tracker can be found at http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com.

The "Not Yet Implemented" issue you had is fixed in trunk now.
> I had to patch RSpec in the below manner to get it running
> on Ruby 1.9, but I doubt these fixes can be the culprit.
>
> --- lib/spec/runner/options.rb.orig     2007-12-27 16:36:03.000000000 +0100
> +++ lib/spec/runner/options.rb  2007-12-27 16:36:28.000000000 +0100
> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@
>        def colour=(colour)
>          @colour = colour
>          begin; \
> -          require ''Win32/Console/ANSI'' if @colour
&& PLATFORM =~ /win32/; \
> +#         require ''Win32/Console/ANSI'' if @colour
&& PLATFORM =~ /win32/; \
>          rescue LoadError ; \
>            raise "You must gem install win32console to use colour on
Windows" ; \
>          end
> --- lib/spec/matchers/be.rb.orig        2007-12-27 16:30:51.000000000 +0100
> +++ lib/spec/matchers/be.rb     2007-12-27 16:32:14.000000000 +0100
> @@ -124,7 +124,8 @@
>          def parse_expected(expected)
>            if Symbol === expected
>              @handling_predicate = true
> -            ["be_an_","be_a_","be_"].each do
|@prefix|
> +            ["be_an_","be_a_","be_"].each do
|at_prefix|
> +              @prefix = at_prefix
>                if expected.starts_with?(@prefix)
>                  return
"#{expected.to_s.sub(@prefix,"")}".to_sym
>                end
>
The change to be.rb has already been applied, but not the change to
options.rb. I''m not sure I see any relationship between that and
problems you might be experiencing with 1.9 (unless win32console does
not yet support 1.9). Feel free to submit a ticket to the tracker on
this one.

Cheers,
David

On Dec 29, 2007 7:44 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Dec 27, 2007 4:28 PM, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) <shot at hot.pl>
wrote:
>
> > I had to patch RSpec in the below manner to get it running
> > on Ruby 1.9, but I doubt these fixes can be the culprit.
> >
> > --- lib/spec/runner/options.rb.orig     2007-12-27 16:36:03.000000000
+0100
> > +++ lib/spec/runner/options.rb  2007-12-27 16:36:28.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@
> >        def colour=(colour)
> >          @colour = colour
> >          begin; \
> > -          require ''Win32/Console/ANSI'' if @colour
&& PLATFORM =~ /win32/; \
> > +#         require ''Win32/Console/ANSI'' if @colour
&& PLATFORM =~ /win32/; \
> >          rescue LoadError ; \
> >            raise "You must gem install win32console to use colour
on Windows" ; \
> >          end
> > --- lib/spec/matchers/be.rb.orig        2007-12-27 16:30:51.000000000
+0100
> > +++ lib/spec/matchers/be.rb     2007-12-27 16:32:14.000000000 +0100
> > @@ -124,7 +124,8 @@
> >          def parse_expected(expected)
> >            if Symbol === expected
> >              @handling_predicate = true
> > -           
["be_an_","be_a_","be_"].each do |@prefix|
> > +           
["be_an_","be_a_","be_"].each do |at_prefix|
> > +              @prefix = at_prefix
> >                if expected.starts_with?(@prefix)
> >                  return
"#{expected.to_s.sub(@prefix,"")}".to_sym
> >                end
> >
>
> The change to be.rb has already been applied, but not the change to
> options.rb. I''m not sure I see any relationship between that and
> problems you might be experiencing with 1.9 (unless win32console does
> not yet support 1.9). Feel free to submit a ticket to the tracker on
> this one.
David, will not be better set @colour back to false if the require
failed, instead of raising the exception?

In that way, colour is automatically disabled, the user warned and
when win32console gets updated for 1.9, all users will be happy :-D

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

David Chelimsky:
> On Dec 27, 2007 4:28 PM, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) <shot at hot.pl>
wrote:
>> I happily hand-compiled Ruby 1.9.0-0 into /home/shot/opt/ruby today
>> and I''m running into a strange error with RSpec ? all my
examples work
>> perfectly with Ruby 1.8 but are considered pending on Ruby 1.9.
>> How can I bugtrack/fix this?
> RSpec''s tracker can be found at http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com.
Right; I?m not too fluent in RSpec yet (in particular, I didn?t use
any pending specs yet), so I just wanted to ask around before filing
a ticket.
> The "Not Yet Implemented" issue you had is fixed in trunk now.
Most appreciated! I?ll wait for RSpec 1.1.2
before switching to Ruby 1.9 in full then.

BTW: The tracker says 1.1.2 ?is 11 months late? and ?Expected: Jan 17th,
2007?. Is 1.1.2 expected in two weeks? time and it should be 2008 there?
>> I had to patch RSpec in the below manner to get it running
>> on Ruby 1.9, but I doubt these fixes can be the culprit.
>> --- lib/spec/runner/options.rb.orig     2007-12-27 16:36:03.000000000
+0100
>> +++ lib/spec/runner/options.rb  2007-12-27 16:36:28.000000000 +0100
>> @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@
>>        def colour=(colour)
>>          @colour = colour
>>          begin; \
>> -          require ''Win32/Console/ANSI'' if @colour
&& PLATFORM =~ /win32/; \
>> +#         require ''Win32/Console/ANSI'' if @colour
&& PLATFORM =~ /win32/; \
>>          rescue LoadError ; \
>>            raise "You must gem install win32console to use colour
on Windows" ; \
>>          end
> The change to be.rb has already been applied, but not the change
> to options.rb. I''m not sure I see any relationship between that
and
> problems you might be experiencing with 1.9 (unless win32console does
> not yet support 1.9).
Sorry for not explaining this one. This is with using `spec -c -D u` on
Ubuntu (with diff-lcs installed) ? I keep running into an ?uninitialized
constant Spec::Runner::Options::PLATFORM? error, hence the simplest
above workaround. Might be a bug in Ruby 1.9 not scoping the class
constants properly, though.
> Feel free to submit a ticket to the tracker on this one.
#215 filed:
http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645-rspec/tickets/215

-- Shot
-- 
> So, this guy gets into Guinness by riding a 70-foot wave,
> toppling the previous record-holder''s 68-footer. How do they
> measure the height of the waves to that degree of accuracy?
With a barometer, silly.         -- John Hatpin and Stan, afca
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20080102/1efb7789/attachment.bin