[rspec-users] plans for cucumber

Chad Humphries
2008-09-23T12:53:05Z

I have one question outside of rspec land in regards to cucumber.
I''ve used it with test unit, test spec, and rspec without issue.
Will it still be a relatively easy require to use on projects  outside
of rspec?  More specifically, is the plan to have it replace story
runner within rspec, or to replace it and stay a separate gem?

--
Chad

On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 8:44 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:21 AM, Ashley Moran
> <ashley.moran at patchspace.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> On 23 Sep 2008, at 02:35, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>
>>> This should work right now with both ''rake spec''
and ''cucumber features''
>>
>> It does, but only as "cucumber features" if I do
"cucumber
>> features/descriptions/xyz.feature" it doesn''t find the
the step file on it''s
>> own.
>
> "the step file" assumes a one to one mapping of feature files to
step
> files. I tend to reuse steps across features, so this has little value
> for me, personally. I think it is a constraint that might serve some
> people''s needs well, but not everybody''s.
>
>> Ben''s TextMate Cucumber bundle reflects this, as it''s
"go to alternate file"
>> command creates steps one level down from the descriptions.
>>
>> Kyle''s "story" command uses the structure
stories/stories and stories/steps
>> so I''m used to working that way.
>
> While I appreciate that some people like to work this way, I don''t
> think everyone does and I don''t think cucumber should be enforcing
> conventions based on this.
>
> What I think *would* make sense is to offer up some
> configuration/mapping scheme that allows you to manage this in a
> number of different ways.
>
> For example, we could add something like autotest uses - if a
> .cucumber file exists it gets loaded before anything else, and it can
> be used to describe mappings as autotest does:
>
> Autotest.add_hook :initialize do |at|
>  at.add_mapping %r%features/(.*).feature% do |filename, match|
>    at.files_matching %r%features/#{match}.rb
>  end
> end
>
> Something along those lines could help satisfy everyone''s needs,
no? WDYT?
>
>> My stories folder always had extra dirs, so I find the layout:
>>  features/
>>    descriptions/
>>      apply.feature
>>      open.feature
>>      start.feature
>>      stop.feature
>>      zoom.feature
>>    matchers/
>>    steps/
>>    support/
>>
>> MUCH easier to follow than:
>>  features/
>>    apply.feature
>>    matchers/
>>    open.feature
>>    start.feature
>>    steps/
>>    stop.feature
>>    support/
>>    zoom.feature
>>
>> This is just how I use it anyway - maybe I''m alone in adding
extra folders
>> like that.  But I still find the nested structure much more logical
than the
>> partially flat one.
>
> I see where you''re coming from in terms of visibility. I tend to
use
> something like this:
>
> features/
>  reservations/
>  schedules/
>  steps/
>  supplies/
>  support/
>
> Admittedly, steps and support are not like reservations, schedules and
> supplies, but this has worked just fine for me so far.
>
> FWIW,
> David
>
>>
>> Ashley
>>
>> --
>> http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
>> http://aviewfromafar.net/
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>