On Oct 21, 2007, at 1:42 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:
> That's how we do it because we don't have the facet facility. For now,
> however, there are too many other moving parts to consider the
> additional layer. I would definitely consider it down the road.
That's ok, I was asking because I was happy to prepare a patch for
it. If I get a few hours I'll have another go. The internals of
RSpec don't look much like the external DSL, that's why it was taking
me a while to figure out where everything has to go (in the specs
that is, the code isn't too hard).
Is it worth me working on this? It's something I'd really like.
While I'm thinking about it - in an ideal world, would better output be:
SomeClass
- facet one: example one
- facet one: example two
- facet two: example three
- facet two: facet three: example four
SomeClass
- facet one
- example one
- example two
- facet two
- example three
- facet three
- example four
Ashley
--
blog @ http://aviewfromafar.net/
linked-in @ http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
currently @ home
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
