similar to: it "should [action] ..." vs it with an active voice

Thanks to discussions on this list, suggestions from many of you and a patch from Pat Maddox, we now have Plain Text User Stories in Story Runner. Read more: http://blog.davidchelimsky.net/articles/2007/10/21/story-runner-in-plain-english Cheers, David

hypothetical question for all you BDD experts: I want to make sure that a :list action always returns widgets in alphabetical order. There''s at least 2 ways of doing this: it "should fetch items in alphabetical order" do Widget.should_receive(:find).with(:order => "name ASC") get :list end it "should fetch items in alphabetical order" do [:red,

I think we all know that the readability of steps isn''t great right now, and in fact there''s a very recent thread that discusses just that. It was that recent thread that prompted me to explore this a bit. The basic idea is that you define step matchers, which have a regex, and then you match step names against that regex. Kind of tough for me to explain so I''ll just

I really would like to know how people are using the Story and Example runner to write their software.It would be great to get some direction on it, because I think I''m missing some points. Taking the outside-in approach in thought: At first we write a high-level customer-facing story, this story fails. Then we start using mocks at object level to use them as a design tool, and so we

A couple months ago I asked how stories and specs might impact each other. [1] If you look at Dan North''s example of what''s in a story [2], and you imagine using the spec framework to drive the design, you can probably imagine a significant bit of overlap in the two. Is that a bad thing? I''m not sure. It has made me a bit uncomfortable though, and I''ve

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

Started a new Rails project, and installed RSpec and the Rails plugin vendor/plugins/rspec (svn://rubyforge.org/var/svn/rspec/trunk/rspec) - 1332 vendor/plugins/rspec_on_rails (svn://rubyforge.org/var/svn/rspec/trunk/rspec_on_rails/vendor/plugins/rspec_on_rails) - 1332 Generated the rspec file, created a model...the spec runs fine if I do ruby spec/models/foo_spec.rb. Running rake though gives

Hi all, I committed a first cut at blockless Givens/Whens/Thens to RSpec''s trunk: cd /path/to/rspec/project svn up cd rspec bin/spec examples/story/calculator.rb Take a look at examples/story/calculator.rb to see what''s going on. Needs docs!!!! Thoughts welcome. I''ve also got a cut at the plain text parser checked in, but it''s not hooked up to anything

Hi I hope this is not OT. I''m training my replacement at work to do BDD Rails development. He''s done a CS/maths degree but has no professional programming experience, so he''s never NOT done a project without BDD. In a way I am jealous of his unspoilt situation :) I''ve gone about things this way: * first teach him some Ruby (he did mainly Java at

So I''d been running gem releases of rspec for the past several months, and I installed edge rspec so that I can use Story Runner. I''m running into a problem because I''ve got a couple rake tasks that reference "spec/rake/raketask". If I try to run "rake spec" then it pulls in the gem version instead of the plugin version. rake blows up saying that

I saw the RCov page at http://rspec.rubyforge.org/tools/rcov.html and decided to add it to my project. My rakefile looks like this: require "rake" require "spec/rake/spectask" desc "Run all specs with RCov" Spec::Rake::SpecTask.new("spec:rcov") do |t| t.spec_files = FileList["spec/**/*_spec.rb"] t.rcov = true end When I run rake spec:rcov,

Hi Easy one - I just wondered why all spec files for rspec_on_rails end "_spec.rb" instead of just ".rb"? They are all inside the spec folder so surely the fact they are specs is implicit? Ashley

I finally got around to upgrading from 0.8.2 (!!). I had a spec which looked like specify "should render abc123" do controller.should_render :text => "abc123" get :key end With 1.0.0, the new spec is it "should render abc123" do get :key response.should render_text("abc123") end However it doesn''t work, giving me the error: undefined

This isn''t specific to RSpec, but is hopefully on-topic for this list. I like (especially when "ping pong pairing") to write a spec, then write the smallest amount of code I can to pass it (especially when "ping pong pairing"). Sometimes this means hard-coding a return value, which means another spec is needed to prove that the code is really behaving as it

Here''s an excellent blog post on Story Runner, which will be part of the next release and is undergoing active development in trunk: http://evang.eli.st/blog/2007/9/1/user-stories-with-rspec-s-story-runner

Here''s a controller spec I wrote, it''s for a very simple RESTful controller (well, aren''t all RESTful controllers simple? :) I''ve created a couple spec helper methods to refactor some of the common code...for example, require_login_and_correct_user creates two specifications: one for when the user isn''t logged in, and one when the user is logged in but

The RSpec Development Team is pleased as glug (that''s kind of like punch, but more festive) to announce RSpec-1.1.0. Thanks to all who have contributed patches over the last few months. Big thanks to Dan North and Brian Takita for their important work on this release. Dan contributed his rbehave framework which is now the Story Runner. Brian patiently did a TON of refactoring around

I''ve been thinking about the role that stories played compared to specs, and that "should we use should" thread brought those thoughts up again. First I want to discuss whether or not specs are authoritative regarding the desired behavior of a system. I would say they''re a good approximation of how the system currently runs according to the developer''s

Fistly, many, many thanks for RSpec and Story Runner. Minor request to improve readability of output Given a scenario item with multiple params.. Eg. And "the user belongs to", "Joe", "Acme" do |user_name, company_name| The readability of the following output is less than ideal.. "And the user belongs to company,Joe Public, No Videos" It would be

rspec_resource_generator ======================== By Pat Maddox Use this generator to generate RESTful scaffolding with RSpec specifications. Syntax is exactly the same as the scaffold_resource generator: ./script/generate rspec_resource ModelName [field:type field:type] When you run this generator, it will create a migration, model, and model spec file. In addition, it gives you a RESTful