rspec users - Mar 2010 - Testing the <=> operator

I''m having trouble getting rspec to allow me to test my Comparable
class.  I
would like to test the <=> method, but rspec is giving me unexpected
results:

@hand = Hand.new(''R'')
@other_hand = Hand.new(''S'')
@hand.should be > @other_hand

expected > #<RPS::Hand:0x7f2d93661490>, got
#<RPS::Hand:0x7f2d936615d0
@guess="R">

Shouldn''t that test be checking for the comparison operator?

chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users/attachments/20100316/d41e171d/attachment.html>

On Mar 15, 2010, at 11:16 PM, Chris DiMartino wrote:
> I''m having trouble getting rspec to allow me to test my Comparable
class.  I would like to test the <=> method, but rspec is giving me
unexpected results:
> 
> @hand = Hand.new(''R'')
> @other_hand = Hand.new(''S'')
> @hand.should be > @other_hand
> 
> expected > #<RPS::Hand:0x7f2d93661490>, got
#<RPS::Hand:0x7f2d936615d0 @guess="R">
> 
> Shouldn''t that test be checking for the comparison operator?
Nope. Keep in mind that most operators in ruby are actually methods. When the
example says:

	@hand.should be > @other_hand

Ruby evaluates that as this:

	@hand.should(be.>(@other_hand))

Which rspec then translates to this (more or less):

	@hand.>(@other_hand) ? pass : fail

That make sense?