Hmm that's true. If the acts_as_list implementation changed, or is removed then this isn't going to work. But you don't really want to go down the rabbit warren of checking that the whole of the acts_as_list implementation works as expected, as presumably that's already tested.
Perhaps I'm just being over complicated, and you could just mock the call to acts_as_list? Of course that still wouldn't guard against the acts_as_list behaviour changing to something that doesn't match what you were trying to achieve. Thanks, more to think about! On 8/15/07, Courtenay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/15/07, Steve Tooke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > How are people specifying models which act_as_list? > > > > I'm thinking that it would be possible to check that acts_as_list > > instance methods have been added to a class using something like this: > > You're specing the code not the behavior. > This will make double-work if you want to change anything. > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-users@rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users > _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
