I''m going through Peepcode''s Rspec Basics for an overview. He''s just doing a simple spec: class PeepCode end describe PeepCode do it "should be awsome" do end end So running spec spec/simple_spec.rb should produce according to his screen cast: 1 example, 0 failures, 1 not implemented but I only recieve: 1 example, 0 failures Also spec spec/simple_spec.rb --format will fail /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/optparse.rb:451:in `parse'': missing argument: --format (OptionParser::MissingArgument) RSpec 1.0.8 ZenTest 3.6.1 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20070916/7a5765c4/attachment.html
Andrew WC Brown wrote:> I''m going through Peepcode''s Rspec Basics for an overview. > > He''s just doing a simple spec: > > class PeepCode > end > > describe PeepCode do > it "should be awsome" do > end > end > > So running spec spec/simple_spec.rb should produce according to his > screen cast: > 1 example, 0 failures, 1 not implemented > > but I only recieve: > 1 example, 0 failures > > Also spec spec/simple_spec.rb --format will fail > /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/optparse.rb:451:in `parse'': missing argument: > --format (OptionParser::MissingArgument) > > RSpec 1.0.8 > ZenTest 3.6.1Don''t you have to omit the block, ''do''...''end'' when you want them to be not implemented? Or, you can use ''pending'' method in the block like this. describe PeepCode do it "should be awesome" end or describe PeepCode do it "should be awesome" do pending("supposed to be pending") end end Cheers, Semin
On 9/16/07, Andrew WC Brown <omen.king at gmail.com> wrote:> I''m going through Peepcode''s Rspec Basics for an overview. > > He''s just doing a simple spec: > > class PeepCode > end > > describe PeepCode do > it "should be awsome" do > end > end > > So running spec spec/simple_spec.rb should produce according to his screen > cast: > 1 example, 0 failures, 1 not implementedI''m pretty sure that I saw the peep code and it showed the right thing here - but I don''t have time to go through it right this minute to verify. That said, if that IS what the screencast says then the screencast is wrong. You can get "Not implemented" with no block: describe PeepCode do it "should be awesome" # no block passed to the #it method end or by using the pending method inside the block: describe PeepCode do it "should be awesome" do pending("for some reason") ... end end or describe PeepCode do it "should be awesome" do pending("for some reason") do ... end ... end end but an empty block (as in your example) just passes. HTH, David> > but I only recieve: > 1 example, 0 failures > > Also spec spec/simple_spec.rb --format will fail > /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/optparse.rb:451:in `parse'': missing > argument: --format (OptionParser::MissingArgument) > > RSpec 1.0.8 > ZenTest 3.6.1 > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users >
Oh, he removed the block. describe PeepCode do it "should be awsome" do end end describe PeepCode do it "should be awsome" end I''m still haven''t solved --format with specing. On 9/16/07, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote:> > On 9/16/07, Andrew WC Brown <omen.king at gmail.com> wrote: > > I''m going through Peepcode''s Rspec Basics for an overview. > > > > He''s just doing a simple spec: > > > > class PeepCode > > end > > > > describe PeepCode do > > it "should be awsome" do > > end > > end > > > > So running spec spec/simple_spec.rb should produce according to his > screen > > cast: > > 1 example, 0 failures, 1 not implemented > > I''m pretty sure that I saw the peep code and it showed the right thing > here - but I don''t have time to go through it right this minute to > verify. That said, if that IS what the screencast says then the > screencast is wrong. You can get "Not implemented" with no block: > > describe PeepCode do > it "should be awesome" # no block passed to the #it method > end > > or by using the pending method inside the block: > > describe PeepCode do > it "should be awesome" do > pending("for some reason") > ... > end > end > > or > > describe PeepCode do > it "should be awesome" do > pending("for some reason") do > ... > end > ... > end > end > > but an empty block (as in your example) just passes. > > HTH, > David > > > > > but I only recieve: > > 1 example, 0 failures > > > > Also spec spec/simple_spec.rb --format will fail > > /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/optparse.rb:451:in `parse'': missing > > argument: --format (OptionParser::MissingArgument) > > > > RSpec 1.0.8 > > ZenTest 3.6.1 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > rspec-users mailing list > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users >-- Monsterbox Productions putting small businesses on-line 1319 Victoria Avenue East Thunder Bay, Ontario P7C 1C3 Canada Andrew WC Brown web-developer and owner andrew at monsterboxpro.com P: 807-626-9009 F: 807-624-2705 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20070916/789bf9a4/attachment.html
Both Solved, User Error =P On 9/16/07, Andrew WC Brown <omen.king at gmail.com> wrote:> > Oh, he removed the block. > > describe PeepCode do > it "should be awsome" do > end > end > > describe PeepCode do > it "should be awsome" > end > > I''m still haven''t solved --format with specing. > > On 9/16/07, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 9/16/07, Andrew WC Brown < omen.king at gmail.com> wrote: > > > I''m going through Peepcode''s Rspec Basics for an overview. > > > > > > He''s just doing a simple spec: > > > > > > class PeepCode > > > end > > > > > > describe PeepCode do > > > it "should be awsome" do > > > end > > > end > > > > > > So running spec spec/simple_spec.rb should produce according to his > > screen > > > cast: > > > 1 example, 0 failures, 1 not implemented > > > > I''m pretty sure that I saw the peep code and it showed the right thing > > here - but I don''t have time to go through it right this minute to > > verify. That said, if that IS what the screencast says then the > > screencast is wrong. You can get "Not implemented" with no block: > > > > describe PeepCode do > > it "should be awesome" # no block passed to the #it method > > end > > > > or by using the pending method inside the block: > > > > describe PeepCode do > > it "should be awesome" do > > pending("for some reason") > > ... > > end > > end > > > > or > > > > describe PeepCode do > > it "should be awesome" do > > pending("for some reason") do > > ... > > end > > ... > > end > > end > > > > but an empty block (as in your example) just passes. > > > > HTH, > > David > > > > > > > > but I only recieve: > > > 1 example, 0 failures > > > > > > Also spec spec/simple_spec.rb --format will fail > > > /usr/local/lib/ruby/1.8/optparse.rb:451:in `parse'': missing > > > argument: --format (OptionParser::MissingArgument) > > > > > > RSpec 1.0.8 > > > ZenTest 3.6.1 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > rspec-users mailing list > > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > rspec-users mailing list > > rspec-users at rubyforge.org > > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > > > > > > -- > Monsterbox Productions > putting small businesses on-line > > 1319 Victoria Avenue East > Thunder Bay, Ontario P7C 1C3 > Canada > > Andrew WC Brown > web-developer and owner > andrew at monsterboxpro.com > P: 807-626-9009 > F: 807-624-2705-- Monsterbox Productions putting small businesses on-line 1319 Victoria Avenue East Thunder Bay, Ontario P7C 1C3 Canada Andrew WC Brown web-developer and owner andrew at monsterboxpro.com P: 807-626-9009 F: 807-624-2705 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20070916/2644d53e/attachment.html