rspec users - Jan 2009 - Step tables

I am having some trouble using step tables.

I am trying with an step similar to the sample step generarated by the
cucumber generator

Then /^I should see the following froobles:$/ do |froobles|
  froobles.raw[1..-1].each_with_index do |row, i|
    row.each_with_index do |cell, j|
      response.should have_selector("table > tr:nth-child(#{i+2}) >
td:nth-child(#{j+1})") { |td|
        td.inner_text.should == cell
      }
    end
  end
end

This works, and I understand the sintaxis, but the problem is that it
works even if I make an error with the data, because it seems that the
block of have_selector is never entered in, and I can''t check nothing
inside the block.

And another question.
I have seen that Cucumber::Model::Table has a ''rows'' method
for
accessing the rows of the table, but is not still in cucumber 0.1.15.
?Where is the method raw defined?

Thanks.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

> ?Where is the method raw defined?
Sorry this is stupid.
Forget my last question
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Can somebody confirm that the have_selector method yields to the block?
In all the test I have done it seems it does not work.

I even have try an step like this

when /whatever ..../ do
  response.should have_selector("table > tr:nth-child(#{2}) >
td:nth-child(#{1})") { |td|
  td.inner_text.should == cell
  "foo".should == "bar"     # I think this would fail no?
 }
end

but the step pass without failing.




-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Ok.

I have solved my problem.

Because I am using spanish for wrinting my features, I didn''t paste the
exact sentences of the code I was using, and pasted instead a 
"manual-translated similar" code.
And nobody could see the problem. Never more.

The problem was that I was writing the block for the have_selector with 
do...end instead of {...}
And it didn''t work in these case.
Is this a bug or is it a special feature of this construct.

Juanma Cervera

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Juanma Cervera <lists at
ruby-forum.com>wrote:
> Ok.
>
> I have solved my problem.
>
> Because I am using spanish for wrinting my features, I didn''t
paste the
> exact sentences of the code I was using, and pasted instead a
> "manual-translated similar" code.
> And nobody could see the problem. Never more.
>
> The problem was that I was writing the block for the have_selector with
> do...end instead of {...}
> And it didn''t work in these case.
> Is this a bug or is it a special feature of this construct.
>
You have to use {} in this case. {} and do..end have different precedence
rules in the Ruby language.

In this case, when you use do..end, the block gets sent to the #should
method (the leftmost), but if you use {} it gets sent to the #have_selector
method (the rightmost).

Aslak

>
> Juanma Cervera
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> rspec-users mailing list
> rspec-users at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
>


-- 
Aslak (::)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20090116/43989240/attachment-0001.html>