search for: should_eql

Hi, I''m trying the specs for restful_authentication I found here http://jonathan.tron.name/articles/2007/01/02/rspec-on-rails-restful- authentication It seems to use custom .should methods: should_eql, should_be_an_instance_of, should_redirect_to, should_be_success, should_not_be_nil, should_be_nil, should_not_be_nil, should_be_empty, should_be_success, should_not_change, and should_not_be_activated Is this using an old version of rspec, and/or do i need to define these methods and how...

...hanges the way RSpec handles equality. Previous releases tried to handle equality based on the way the words read, rather than the way ruby actually handles equality. So, with this release and going forward: * actual.should_equal(expected) will pass if actual.equal?(expected) returns true * actual.should_eql(expected) will pass if actual.eql?(expected) returns true * actual.should == expected will pass if actual == expected) returns true At the high level, eql? implies equivalence, while equal? implies object identity. For more information on how ruby deals w/ equality, you should do this: ri equal?...

...class Object def should_be_different(method = nil, difference = nil) return self.should_not_eql(yield) if method.nil? before = self.send(method) yield return self.send(method).should_not_eql(before) if difference.nil? (self.send(method) - before).should_eql difference end end Usage: specify "should be able to create a new user" do Person.create(:name => ''joe'') Person.should_be_different :count do Person.create(:name => ''bob'') end end This has...

We''d like to get some feedback on RSpec 0.9 before we start pushing out releases via Rubyforge''s gem server and update the website. We have therefore made the first beta of 0.9 available - both prepackaged and tagged in subversion (see below). RSpec 0.9 introduces a new API for expectations, which essentially means that your underscores go away (there has been other discussions

Hi I''m following the tutorial from the website. I''ve got to the end, but I''ve been getting this failure: ''A stack with one item should return top when you send it top FAILED "one item" should equal "one item" ./stack_spec.rb:28: ./stack_spec.rb:27:in ''instance_eval'' 3 specs 1 failure I do not

I''m trying out rspec_on_rails with a very simple test: ... specify "product name should be ''test''" do Product.find( :all ).first.name.should_equal ''test'' end ... with this fixture: first: id: 1 name: test When I run it: .F 1) ''Given a generated product_spec.rb with fixtures loaded product name should be

Hi RSpec Mailing list, I''m new to RSpec and I am trying to get it running with the caboo.se sample rails app. I installed the current version of rspec with rspec_on_rails I tried to run rake spec but received: 330-07:~/desktop/restful_auth_rspec/vendor multimedia$ rake spec (in /Users/multimedia/Desktop/restful_auth_rspec)

Hi all ! I just started writing specs on a new project. I would just like to validate that this is the way you would write it. I know about mocks, stubs and expectations. I don''t think this is a problem for me. My question really boils down to: def index @projects = current_user.projects.active end My spec needs to return the proxy, no ? Here''s my code: context "A

I''ve notice that a project like Rubinius has both a spec & a test directory. Rspec has only a spec directory. Obviously I support BDD, but isn''t there also a place for state based/verification testing? I sometimes sense that I *do* want to practice Test Driven Development. That is, I want some assurance that my production code will run as intended. But I also