rspec users - Feb 2009 - A silent cucumber?

I believe that what I am trying to do should be possible, but I cannot
seem to find the right combination of switches to get cucumber to run
silently and only print the failing and pending steps.  I do not have a
cucumber.yml file

I have tried the following (from the project root):

$ cucumber -q
...
0 scenarios

If I run rake features then I have 29 scenarios.

$ cucumber -q features
...
29 scenarios
29 steps failed
125 steps skipped
22 steps pending (22 with no step definition)

If I run rake features then 172 steps pass 3 are skipped and 1 is
pending

$ cucumber -q -r features features
...
Pending Notes:
And /entity named "(.*)" (is|is not) an? "(.*)"/ (TODO) #
features/app/models/entities/step_definitions/entity_steps.rb:20

29 scenarios
172 steps passed
3 steps skipped
1 step pending

Close, but I still see all of the feature scenarios and steps, just not
the files that they come from.

Is there a way to only display the step detail for feature scenarios
that contain failing or pending steps?
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

On 26 Feb 2009, at 18:57, James Byrne wrote:
> Is there a way to only display the step detail for feature scenarios
> that contain failing or pending steps?
I think you''ll have to write your own formatter.

It''s pretty easy - take a look at the examples in lib/cucumber/ 
formatter for some pointers.

Matt Wynne
http://blog.mattwynne.net
http://www.songkick.com

Matt Wynne wrote:
> On 26 Feb 2009, at 18:57, James Byrne wrote:
>> Is there a way to only display the step detail for feature scenarios
>> that contain failing or pending steps?
> 
> I think you''ll have to write your own formatter.
> 
> It''s pretty easy - take a look at the examples in lib/cucumber/
> formatter for some pointers.
Thanks.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Matt Wynne wrote:
> 
> I think you''ll have to write your own formatter.
> 
Actually, after looking at the code I discover that the existing 
progress formatter does just about what I was looking for.

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