Hi,
Could someone help me resolve this conflict:
Then the selected item should have a <label> tag with
"Foo:"
Multiple step definitions match "the selected item should have a
<label> tag with \"Foo:\"": (Cucumber::Multiple)
features/step_definitions/page_builder_steps.rb:355:in `/^the
(selected|first|second|last) item should have a \<(.*)\> tag with
"(.*)"/''
features/step_definitions/browser_steps.rb:117:in `/^the (.*) should
have a \<(.*)\> tag with "(.*)"/''
Perhaps tell it to ignore any matches with " item" in it, but dont
know how
linoj
Are the steps doing anything different? I mean it seems like selected| first|second are part of .* so you can put that specific logic in the step I would thing and have one step to handle them all Or then just change slightly your sentence so they don t overlap Emmanuel On Dec 28, 2008, at 8:59 PM, Jonathan Linowes wrote:> Hi, > Could someone help me resolve this conflict: > > > Then the selected item should have a <label> tag with "Foo:" > > Multiple step definitions match "the selected item should have a > <label> tag with \"Foo:\"": (Cucumber::Multiple) > > features/step_definitions/page_builder_steps.rb:355:in `/^the > (selected|first|second|last) item should have a \<(.*)\> tag with > "(.*)"/'' > > features/step_definitions/browser_steps.rb:117:in `/^the (.*) should > have a \<(.*)\> tag with "(.*)"/'' > > > Perhaps tell it to ignore any matches with " item" in it, but dont > know how > > linoj > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Jonathan Linowes <jonathan at parkerhill.com> wrote:> > Perhaps tell it to ignore any matches with " item" in it, but dont know howIt''s called a zero-width negative lookahead, and it looks like this: /^the (?!\w+ item)(.*) should have a \<(.*)\> tag with "(.*)"/ I didn''t test this to be sure, but I believe it should work. But rephrasing your steps so that one isn''t a special case of the other would probably be better. Or just having one step that contains the logic from both. -- Have Fun, Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com) ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine http://www.escapepod.org
Thanks that worked. Normally I would combine them into one step, but this case, one is in a general reusable steps file, and the other is specific to a feature. I thought the word "item" would be sufficient to distinguish the two. On Dec 29, 2008, at 1:07 AM, Stephen Eley wrote:> On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Jonathan Linowes > <jonathan at parkerhill.com> wrote: >> >> Perhaps tell it to ignore any matches with " item" in it, but dont >> know how > > It''s called a zero-width negative lookahead, and it looks like this: > /^the (?!\w+ item)(.*) should have a \<(.*)\> tag with "(.*)"/ > > I didn''t test this to be sure, but I believe it should work. But > rephrasing your steps so that one isn''t a special case of the other > would probably be better. Or just having one step that contains the > logic from both. > > > -- > Have Fun, > Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com) > ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine > http://www.escapepod.org > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users