similar to: State Based vs. Behaviour Based Spec/Testing

Test First Development is great...But should you use it when you are adding classes/methods on to external library that doesn''t have an extensive test suite? I noticed that the rspec plugin for autotest has no specs. David Chemlinsky said something to the list a while back that has been stewing in my subconscious - that you develop software differently using Test First

How would you spec out something like the following: def a_method x = Class.new do include Enumerable end # do something here with x end describe "The Anonymous Class" do before :each do @anonymous_class = mock Class Class.stub!(:new).and_return @anonymous_class end it "should create a new anonymous class" do

<http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=10368> Came across this as a stub page browsing Amazon UK. This is good news! I''m surprised it hasn''t been discussed on the list before. Was Chad keeping it a secret? I hope it will have plenty of BDD theory. I''m still waiting for that magic book I can give to someone and say "here - read this, it

Hi all, I''ve been thinking about the whole validator/relationship speccing issue, and I came up with a suggestion, which I''d love to get some feedback on. The full article is available at http://www.inter-sections.net/ 2007/10/19/what-to-test-and-specify-and-where-to-do-it/ , with the relevant bit being about halfway down, but here''s the gist of it: 1.

Here is the list of Ruby related projects accepted for GSoC. It includes two very similar projects (seemingly the same project, really, but I''m not saying anything ;) ) using RSpec to build a spec suite for implementations of the Ruby language: http://code.google.com/soc/ruby/about.html I''m, personally, very excited about the implications of this. Thanks to all of you who use,

At times I''ve gotten the message "No Server Running" from drbspec with my rails app. The thing is, the drb server certainly is running! This happened a few times with my model specs. I''m not sure exactly what the problem was there - I believe I was loading up fixtures that didn''t exist. I was calling fixtures :singular_table_name as opposed to

Just wanted to pick some smart people about this topic: What are you guys doing to increase the speed of your specs? I''m a big fan of autotest, but right now my current project has 438 specs (for rails). Most of them are in the model, and for all of them we are hitting the database (they are more functional specs than unit-tests). The whole suite takes 112 seconds (meaning the

I am starting to BDD. When specing the controller I want to test for object creation: it "deberia crear una nueva persona en post create" do Usuario.should_receive(:create).with({:nombre => "camilo", :clave => "secreta", :tipo => "administrador"}).and_return(@usuario) post ''create'', {:usuario => {:nombre =>

Hi there, I can''t seem to access the fixture name as a class variable from my specs. I have to set the variable in the spec setup. ... [fixtures] my_fixture: id: 1 ... [rpsec] @my_fixture.id.should == 1 ... [error] You have a nil object when you didn''t expect it! The error occurred while evaluating nil.id ... [my setup] RSpec-0.7.5.1 (r1395) - BDD for Ruby Rails

I have a spec which is failing, but I just can''t say why. Maybe I''m missing something painfully obvious? Here is the pastie of the results & the spec: http://pastie.caboo.se/42626 The spec to look for is "should have an array of users" I''ve printed out ("puts''ed") to the terminal the fact that the values are *opposite* to what

While the spirit of BDD is to spec first and code second, many of us have legacy code. Worse, some of us have legacy code without very good coverage. Recognizing that *I* have such code, I created a script that grinds through your .rb files and creates placeholder specs for each public method. While it is more sensible to spec behavior of code function than of individual methods, this

What is the appropriate way to stub out (and put an expectation on Object#__send__), without getting warnings from the Rspec mock library? Scott

As it is currently, in trunk, --failures and --examples except a text file, each line containing the name of a spec. I''m wondering: Would a a patch to use YAML (instead or as well as) plain text be welcomed? I''m thinking of a yaml file like the following: spec_file_1: file: spec/person_spec.rb specs: - should have first name - should provide email address

Is it a bad practice to use a subversion repository to the trunk of rspec and rspec_on_rails? Or rather, is it doomed to fail, since my gem will always be out of date? I know I can''t use spec, installed from gem,s if I have the latest revision of rspec and rspec_on_rails checked into my plugins directory. But I should still be able to use it with the --drb option, correct?

Has the should_... syntax changed? I''m getting errors when running the following: should_render(:index) should_be_valid should_not_be_valid should_respond_to should_be should_render I thought the syntax changed to something like the following: obj.should render(:index) but this doesn''t seem to work. Scott

What is the difference between these two ways of mocking (with and without the string): mock(''Object'') and mock(Object) ? Scott

I want to create a spec/regressions directory with various regressions (for my rails project). I tried the following: describe LoginController, "regression for user creation when steves_sister does not exist", :behavior_type => :controller do controller_name :login before :each do @params = { "commit"=>"Create Account",

Hi folks. I''m very interested in the status of a port of any_instance from Mocha to RSpec. In particular I have a spec suite that I wrote using RSpec but with Mocha that depends heavily on any_instance. This is because it stubs out one or two methods from an underlying API. In attempting to convert the suite to RSpec mocks (because that''s what we''re using for the rest

Is anyone using rspec with autotest? Scott

If I got this to work, do you think we could/should check in rspec_autotest into rspec? I''ve updated rspec_autotest abit, so let me know if you''d like the modified code. Scott