On Nov 25, 2007, at 7:35 AM, David Chelimsky wrote: > On Nov 24, 2007 7:47 PM, Scott Taylor > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Nov 21, 2007, at 3:17 PM, aslak hellesoy wrote: >> >>> On 11/21/07, Chad Humphries <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> One of the recent trunk changesets modified the default >>>> behaviour to >>>> fail fast if duplicate examples are detected within a single >>>> behaviour/ >>>> example group. This is basically letting you know you have to >>>> "it" >>>> blocks in the behaviour with the same description. >>>> >>> >>> This is correct. It's not a bug - it's by design and documented in >>> CHANGES. >>> >>> The reason I put it in has an interesting explanation. Over the past >>> few days our coverage dropped from 100% to 99.9% and we couldn't >>> understand why. RCov reported that some code wasn't being >>> covered, but >>> I *knew* there were examples covering it. >>> >>> Something was fishy. >>> >>> Then I remembered that Brian a few days ago did a change to the >>> internals - every it block now creates a method with the same >>> name as >>> the description, and later calls that method to run the example. >>> Nothing wrong with that, but it had some sideeffects we didn't think >>> about: If there were duplicates, the last one would simply overwrite >>> (monkey patch!) the previous one with the same name. And as a result >>> never get run. >>> >>> Since I'm a fail fast kind of guy I made RSpec do that. >> >> In light of the duplicate examples which would come about with the >> following: >> >> it do >> foo.should == bar >> end >> >> - how about providing the behaviour described above as an option to >> the runner? > > I'm not sure what you mean. Please give an example.
I was saying that we should have the --no-duplicate options to the runner, which would raise an error when it encountered a duplicate example. It might be useful occasionally (for my test suite of 1400 specs, it found three duplicates, which would be pretty hard to fish out otherwise). Scott _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
