[rspec-users] != again

Rick DeNatale
Mon, 02 Jun 2008 17:56:38 -0000

On Sun, Jun 1, 2008 at 10:13 PM, Scott Taylor <mailing_lists at
railsnewbie.com>
wrote:

>
> On Jun 1, 2008, at 4:55 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>>
>> RSpec is already getting dinged for being slower than test/unit. Making
it
>> run any slower than it already does is a deal breaker for me.
>>
>
> It seems perfectly reasonable that rspec is bigger than test/unit:
> Test::Unit doesn''t have a mocking framework, and so on.  On the
other hand,
> if no one uses (rspec''s) mocking framework, should rspec have the
code in
> place anyway?


I spoke up on the code size issue some months ago:
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/articles/2008/01/29/why-i-dont-mind-using-rspec-in-fact-ive-come-to-love-it

As for whether or not the rspec mocking framework should be separately
loadable, that''s a separate question.

>
>
> Anyway - I''ve never found it to be too slow.  Has anyone done
benchmarks on
> it?


Like most other things, how slow or fast depends on how you use it. Here at
@work, we have a really large rails app with a mixture of legacy tests and
new specs.  The slowest part of the overall test/spec suite, by far, is the
legacy functional tests, which we hope to gradually convert to controller
and view specs, using mocking as possible to avoid the db overhead, which is
the real culprit.

--
Rick DeNatale

My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20080602/bcbc3008/attachment-0001.html>