similar to: a commitment to underscores

rspec''ers I''ve committed numerous changes relating to dots, underscores, and mocks. This code will break your specs that use dots (with a couple of exceptions noted below), so you''ll have to change the dots to underscores if you''ve been using them. Feel free to check out the trunk, run it against your existing specs and report back any problems other than

I sent this earlier under with the subject "artificial sugar causes cancer" and I think some spam filters ate it. Here it is again: ====================================== All, If you look at http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6760&group_id=797&atid=3149 you''ll see that Chad (the submitter) found the source of the bug. Unfortunately, the source

All, If you look at http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=6760&group_id=797&atid=3149 you''ll see that Chad (the submitter) found the source of the bug. Unfortunately, the source of *this* bug is the *solution* to a *previous bug* in which Rails was replacing RSpec''s method missing with its own. When we settled on underscores, my one reservation was

Hi all, How can I use spec fixtures with rails integration tests ? I''ve tried adding {{ fixtures "../../spec/fixtures/myfixture" }} to the integration test but the fixtures are not loaded when I run the rake task. Rails doesn''t load symlinked fixtures either so I copied the files from spec/fixtures for the time being. Not very DRY. Any ideas ? Keith

On 4/27/07, David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> wrote: > Any other suggestions? > > In general, I''m much more inclined to favor an additional parameter > passed to #it over a new method name. Since I suggested in the other thread that perhaps during_event and on_event could append text to the spec string, here''s another similar (but simpler) suggestion

Now that RSpec is nearing 1 dot oh, are there any plans to implement an integration testing equivalent in RSpec On Rails?

Dear spec''ers, As many of you already know, we''re gearing up for a pretty big 0.8 release of RSpec in the next couple of weeks. I''m writing in advance because I want to give you a heads up about upcoming changes and how they may impact your existing specs. Two important things to note first: 1. We will provide a translator that you''ll be able to use to

This release represents a formal commitment to underscores (dots are no longer supported), which allowed us to reduce the code base by nearly 10%. http://rubyforge.org/frs/shownotes.php?release_id=6377 http://rspec.rubyforge.org/ To be clear, if you have dots in your examples, they may break. The only exception to the rule is after "once" or "twice" when setting mock

Hey all, Just a heads up that the ZenTest-3.9.0 release is not compatible with RSpec-1.1.2. I thought I had a release ready to go, but differences between a preview release of ZenTest that I received and the actual release seem to have broken compatibility. We''ll get this resolved soon, but in the mean time please hold off on upgrading to ZenTest-3.9.0 if you''re using RSpec.

Martin, Thank you for discussing this amongst R-core and for detailing the R-core discussion here. Some specific examples where having underscores available would have been useful. 1. My primerTree package (2013) was originally primer_tree, but I had to change the name to camelCase to comply with the check requirements. Using camelCase in the package name makes reading code jarring, as the

> > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 06:35:01 -0700 > From: David Chelimsky <dchelimsky at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Coloured output in rspec 1.1.4 > To: rspec-users at rubyforge.org > Message-ID: <175B70FE-B706-4C03-8B20-C5B207268AD6 at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes > > On May 29, 2008,

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

Hi all, For those of you checking out the Rails 2.0 preview release: RSpec-1.0.8 does not support Rails 2.0. Unfortunately, we''re in the middle of some big changes to the internals in trunk and won''t be in a position to do a release for another week or so. Therefore, if you are using the Rails 2.0 preview, you''ll need to use the RSpec trunk. Additionally, right now

Hi all, We''ve moved the rspec website to http://rspec.info. We want http://rspec.org, of course, but someone is squatting on and has yet to respond to my email :( The 1.1.0 docs are there. The 1.0.8 docs are still at http://rspec.rubyforge.org for the time being. We''ll be archiving them at the new site soon. This new site is hosted on our shiny new sponsored slice at Engine

The RSpec Development Team is pleased to announce the release of RSpec 0.7.5. This release adds support for Heckle - Seattle''rb''s code mutation tool. There are also several bug fixes to the RSpec core and the RSpec on Rails plugin. Changes: http://rspec.rubyforge.org/changes.html Download: http://rubyforge.org/frs/?group_id=797 or gem install rspec Happy spec''ing,

Howdy, I have emailed before about the inconsistencies I''m spotting when using named routes/resource, but I think I''ve narrowed down the issue. It would seem this has nothing to do with rspec per se, but more with how routing works with rails. If you have an object instance, that isn''t saved and you attempt to generate a path for that item, even though the item may

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 In light of the fact that RSpec mocks are going into maintenance mode in the near future, I was wondering what everyone was switching to. I liked the look of FlexMock most, so gave that a shot. However, there''s a few things that don''t work well with RSpec due to the traditional differences in the way Test::Unit cases are written vs RSpec specs. (One spec per

Hello! I''m just a caveman with some caveman questions. I''ve been parsing Rspec for quite a while, and I''m writing my first series of specs. My initial impressions are "Verbose, but understandable. Helpful and intuitive, but so much to digest." I want to congratulate the folks who are dedicating a chunk of their lives to writing this, and ask 2 caveman

I know this isn''t autotest-users but I''m not sure where else to bring this up: [["app/controllers/contents_controller.rb", Wed Jun 04 14:11:03 +0100 2008]] [["app/controllers/contents_controller.rb", Wed Jun 04 14:11:03 +0100 2008]] /System/Library/Frameworks/Ruby.framework/Versions/1.8/usr/bin/ruby -S script/spec -O spec/spec.opts spec/models/user_spec.rb