On 10/24/07, Scott Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Okay - so the sqlite bug reported a day or so ago on the list is real > bug. I'm going to file something in the tracker for that... > > I also learned that before(:all)...after(:all) is not wrapped in a > transaction, the way before(:each)...after(:each) is. Is there some > reason behind this? Can you not wrap transactions inside transactions?
Only for DBs that support it. And it would add quite a bit of complexity to rspec I think. This is not really the intent of before(:all). It is more akin to TestCaseSetup in xUnit - i.e. a class level method that doesn't share state w/ the examples. So you might have some load script to get the DB into a known state before(:all), and then run each example in a transaction so it rolls back to that known state. I *think* that's how rails does it but I'd have to peruse the code to verify that. Accessing fixtures in before(:all) is something you can't do right now because before(:all) is not running in the same scope as the examples are - in fact, it runs before fixtures are loaded. Even if we changed that, you still wouldn't want to access them before each, because you'd be keeping a handle on objects whose underlying data are getting rolled back after each example. Talk about unexpected consequences!!!!! _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
