No arguments there! Just curious why it didn't work...
FWIW - I just did it and it seemed OK...
/features/steps/holiday_steps.rb
...
Then /^there should be 2 nodes in the control group$/ do
Fixtures.create_fixtures(/../../test/fixtures, holiday_schedules)
end
...
Tim Walker wrote:
FWIW - I just did it and it seemed OK...
/features/steps/holiday_steps.rb
...
Then /^there should be 2 nodes in the control group$/ do
Fixtures.create_fixtures(/../../test/fixtures, holiday_schedules)
end
...
/test/fixtures/holiday_schedules.yml
one:
for_year:
Tim Walker wrote:
Question: In Cucumber when you're writing code to satisfy steps and
accessing the model objects directly, what support for asserts,
responses, etc.
do people use. (the equivalent of ActionController::TestCase and
ActiveSupport::TestCase), Fixtures, etc.
Thanks,
T
Great post James. Very, helpful. Perhaps should be on the cucumber
Wiki? I hope someone follows up on the load fixtures question. Lots to
go play with now!!! Tim
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 11:04 AM, James Byrne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim Walker wrote:
Question: In Cucumber when you're writing
Fixtures = yuk!!
Try object_daddy or maybe factory_girl instead :)
Andrew
2008/11/26 Tim Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Great post James. Very, helpful. Perhaps should be on the cucumber
Wiki? I hope someone follows up on the load fixtures question. Lots to
go play with now!!! Tim
On Wed, Nov
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:52 AM, Ben Mabey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Premdas wrote:
I came across this idea of dropping unit tests for acceptance tests in
the java world. It didn't like it there and I don't like it here, but
maybe thats because I'm an old fuddy duddy or something :). I
James Byrne wrote:
As I work with Rails TestUnit tests I am reconsidering how to use
I discover that in Ruby 1.9 TestUnit is out and minitest is in. I
wonder what effect, if any, this will have on future releases of Rails.
http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/171625
--
Posted via
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 8:34 PM, Raimond Garcia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wow, if that's it in a nutshell... :)
Pat
Thanks Pat, great summary.
I have to admit that I'm as crazy as Yehuda,
and believe that all we need are just acceptance tests,
at different layers of abstraction, for
On 25 Nov 2008, at 17:26, Ben Mabey wrote:
David Chelimsky wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:52 AM, Ben Mabey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew Premdas wrote:
I came across this idea of dropping unit tests for acceptance
tests in
the java world. It didn't like it there and I don't like it
Question: In Cucumber when you're writing code to satisfy steps and accessing
the model objects directly, what support for asserts, responses, etc.
do people use. (the equivalent of ActionController::TestCase and
ActiveSupport::TestCase), Fixtures, etc.
Thanks,
T
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:16
Tim Walker wrote:
Question: In Cucumber when you're writing code to satisfy steps and
accessing the model objects directly, what support for asserts, responses,
etc.
do people use. (the equivalent of ActionController::TestCase and
ActiveSupport::TestCase), Fixtures, etc.
Cucumber depends
James Byrne wrote:
Aslak Hellesøy wrote:
Cucumber depends upon RSpec.
No it doesn't
Aslak
Forgive my misapprehension.
So, where does one find a comprehensive list of expectations for
cucumber step matchers? Things like:
response.body.should +~ \pattern\
In my ignorance I have
James Byrne wrote:
Aslak Hellesøy wrote:
Cucumber depends upon RSpec.
No it doesn't
Aslak
Forgive my misapprehension.
However, this is what rdoc says:
cucumber 0.1.9 [rdoc] [www] - depends on diff-lcs, hoe, rspec,
term-ansicolor, treetop.
--
Posted via
Ben Mabey wrote:
The previous gem releases of cucumber required the rspec gem but as of a
few commits ago that dependency is only there for developing cucumber.
-Ben
I see. So, if I understand correctly, rspec is the default testing
framework? But, if one wished to incorporate minitest
James Byrne wrote:
But, if one wished to incorporate minitest say, then one
would extend the cucumber world
Where does one put this? A the begining of each step_definitions file?
In support/env.rb?
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
___
James Byrne wrote:
Ben Mabey wrote:
The previous gem releases of cucumber required the rspec gem but as of a
few commits ago that dependency is only there for developing cucumber.
-Ben
I see. So, if I understand correctly, rspec is the default testing
framework? But, if one wished
James Byrne wrote:
James Byrne wrote:
But, if one wished to incorporate minitest say, then one
would extend the cucumber world
Where does one put this? A the begining of each step_definitions file?
In support/env.rb?
You only need it once- so the env.rb file is fine and
Ben Mabey wrote:
Right. Although, I'm unsure if rspec is even the default framework
outside of the rails generators.
-Ben
Where can one get a handy quick reference of what syntax is acceptable
to cucumber by default?
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
James Byrne wrote:
Ben Mabey wrote:
Right. Although, I'm unsure if rspec is even the default framework
outside of the rails generators.
-Ben
Where can one get a handy quick reference of what syntax is acceptable
to cucumber by default?
Hmm.. I'm not sure what you mean but the
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 9:54 PM, James Byrne [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Aslak Hellesøy wrote:
Cucumber depends upon RSpec.
No it doesn't
Aslak
Forgive my misapprehension.
Sorry - I should never email from my iPhone.
What I meant is that Cucumber itself does not have any
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Tim Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since Cucumber is about BDD and defining the acceptable and desired
behavior of the software through plain english (executable
requirements if you will) it is not always clear what level the
steps will implement.
In the
James Byrne wrote:
into this. Now, so far I have considered three possibilities:
Ok, five...
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
Hi guys,
I'm having trouble figuring out where the line between writing a spec or
a feature is.
Since I started with rspec stories, I have the idea that stories where
just the evolution of specs.
My main reason for this was the re-usability of steps throughout
stories, which I think is great.
On 25/11/2008, at 7:29 AM, Pat Maddox wrote:
Lately I've been putting more and more stuff into ATs. I'm finding it
valuable to keep tests for domain logic separate from plain ol unit
tests...meaning that my Account object may be tested mostly with
Cucumber, but helper objects such as a stats
Shane Mingins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 25/11/2008, at 7:29 AM, Pat Maddox wrote:
Lately I've been putting more and more stuff into ATs. I'm finding it
valuable to keep tests for domain logic separate from plain ol unit
tests...meaning that my Account object may be tested mostly with
Pat Maddox wrote:
Here's my latest Theory of Testing, in a nutshell:
I really understand what you are getting at. However, as I less
experienced developer (my degree is actually in business) I have found
that having more unit tests (for models and controllers) helps ensure
that I write better
Pau Cor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Pat Maddox wrote:
Here's my latest Theory of Testing, in a nutshell:
I really understand what you are getting at. However, as I less
experienced developer (my degree is actually in business) I have found
that having more unit tests (for models and
I came across this idea of dropping unit tests for acceptance tests in
the java world. It didn't like it there and I don't like it here, but
maybe thats because I'm an old fuddy duddy or something :). I do think
that every public method of an object should be specifically unit
tested, and yes that
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Mark Wilden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 10:29 AM, Pat Maddox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I disagree with the part about edge cases. Acceptance Tests are about
defining and verifying business value, and edge cases are supremely
valuable to
Andrew Premdas wrote:
I came across this idea of dropping unit tests for acceptance tests in
the java world. It didn't like it there and I don't like it here, but
maybe thats because I'm an old fuddy duddy or something :). I do think
that every public method of an object should be specifically
30 matches
Mail list logo
