similar to: shared behav

Hi I''ve spec''d a class and they pass. Now I''d like to assure that any subclass of this class also passes the same specs. Any suggestions for a clever way to handle this? I''d prefer to keep the existing specs as is (eg instead of moving everything into shared behaviors, or doing something to all the ''describe'' lines) thanks linoj

I''m trying to use it_should_behave_like, and something seems to be wonky with the syntax. When I add :shared=>true, the DSL complains that the next line is the fixture declaration: /vendor/plugins/rspec/lib/spec/dsl/behaviour_eval.rb:137:in `method_missing'': undefined method `fixtures'' for #<Spec::DSL::EvalModule:0x324a2cc> (NoMethodError) Here''s the

Hi, I want to be able to get at the described class in my shared behaviour. I''m sure an example will say it better than my words describe "my shared", :shared => true do it "should tell me what the class is its describing" do how_do_i_get_the_user_class_here end end describe User do it_should_behave_like "my shared" #... end So in my

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

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",

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 Or rather, is it doomed to fail, since my gem will always be out of date?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

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

Is anyone using rspec with autotest? Scott

Just ran svn up this morning, and got this (after running ./script/ generate rspec) escher: ./script/spec spec/models/item_spec.rb Finished in 8.0e-06 seconds 0 examples, 0 failures ./script/spec:4:in `run'': wrong number of arguments (3 for 1) (ArgumentError) from ./script/spec:4 Using rails 1.2.3, rspec trunk, on Mac OS X.4.9. Any ideas, or is this a bug in

I believe for rails projects you can put rspec''s code repos into vendor/plugins, and autotest will automatically use the rspec binary in that directory, and not the gem installed. Is there an easy way to do this for non-rails projects? There are a few advancements on trunk which I would like to take advantage of. Tips welcome ; ). Scott Taylor

Is there some reason that pending() *MUST* take an argument? Scott

It looks to me that hpricot is a dependency to building rspec: euclid% rake pre_commit (in /Users/smtlaissezfaire/ruby/projects/rspec/hpricot) rake aborted! Could not find RubyGem hpricot (>= 0.0.0) /Users/smtlaissezfaire/ruby/projects/rspec/hpricot/rakefile:9 (See full trace by running task with --trace) Let me know if I''m wrong. Otherwise, I''ll submit a patch in the docs.

Mocha''s mock/stub framework has the ability to stub all methods on a mock given. Does RSpec''s mocking framework have this ability? And if not, is there some reason it shouldn''t be implemeneted? Regards, Scott

I am completely baffled by this one - My guess is that there is no pure ruby way to do this - but how could I set up a spec to test that one method is an alias of another? Thanks for any help, Scott

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

I have the following code, which yields instance eval''s the block given: class Foo def bar(&blk) instance_eval &blk end def baz yield end end The effect of this is that self is reassigned: Foo.new.bar do # here, self is the instance of Foo # created by new end But normally self is the object in which Foo.new.bar {...} occurs. Foo.new.baz do

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