On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 1:48 PM, Michael Latta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Thanks for the clarrification of your intent for the comment.
After reading
the linked threads I have the following questions/comments:
1) All the responses to sharing story content get "use ruby" as the
response.
2( I understand you appear to find this adequate. I do not.
3) Should I open a new ticket for my suggestion or just add to the
existing
ticket?
That ticket (http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/16211/tickets/3)
is fine. The thing that Aslak is already planning on doesn't really
address aggregating steps written in "scenario language".
What I would like to see is something like a "feature" that is
just for
reuse. The current scenario and feature in cucumber combine 2
concepts: the
definition of a scenario/feature and the execution of a scenario/
feature.
This is like being unable to create a function without calling it
immediately in place. While I appreciate for the top level of
control this
is convenient and natural for the reader. It largely prevents
reuse. I
would like a new keyword that just defines a sequence of steps as
one step.
I want step definitions in the story language.
StepGiven: Log in as admin
Given: I am registered as admin, David, secret
When I log in with David, secret
Then I should see "Welcome David"
And I should see a link to "Manage Content"
Scenario: Admin clicks on "Manage Content"
Given Log in as admin
When I click on "Manage Content"
Then I should see a link to "Go back to menu"
This would only execute the scenario once, unlike GivenScenario.
You can
place StepGiven, and StepWhen, and StepThen in any file and they
only define
steps that can be used by other content. They can reference steps
created
in either ruby or story language. You can choose to present the
nested
steps or not. In HTML output it could be expanded and collapsed.
In text
output there could be an option to limit output nesting depth.
To make this fully functional there should be a Require: that
allows files
with step definitions to be required, solving most of your shared
content
objections for file management. Content can be required and need
not be
executed unless so desired and referenced by a scenario.
It would require the title for the Steps to be regex expressions and
variables dealt with in stories I guess. But, when presenting to
customers
having shared content is important for validation of the
specifications.
For acceptance testing one level may be enough, but for
specifications
there needs to be nesting and shared content that can be verified
by the
customer or their non-programmer representative or domain
experts. For
reference the project I hope to use this on is expected to be 50-100
technical people. We are going to really need readable specs for
business
logic, UI, and so on.
What do you think?
I'm not comfortable with the idea of stripping out the Thens or
adding
constructs like Require to features. Dependencies are a code concept
and I think that stating dependencies in a feature would be more
confusing that clarifying.
I do appreciate the goal, however, of being able to express "macros"
in "scenario" language. What I'd propose is that we add a macros
directory in which we'd have macro definition files that are just
like
the ruby step definition files. So while you could define such a
macro
in a ruby file like this (once Aslak implements it):
Given "I am logged in as admin" do
Given "I am registered as admin, David, secret"
When "I log in with David, secret"
end
... you'd also be able to do it in a macro file like this (macro is
just a suggestion, feel free to counter):
Macros:
Given: I am logged in as admin
Given I am registered as admin, David, secret
When I log in with David, secret
WDYT about that? Now you could use ruby or "scenario language" to
say:
Scenario: admin can manage content
Given I am logged in as admin
Then I should see I should see a link to "Manage Content"
Although, now that I see this, I don't like the fact that the Given
includes a When (an action). I think I'd rather see this expressed
this way:
Macros:
When: I log in as admin
Given I am registered as admin, David, secret
When I log in with David, secret
Scenario: admin can manage content
When I log in as admin
Then I should see I should see a link to "Manage Content"
Then the question becomes whether the output should "explode" the
macro for the reader. I think it would be useful sometimes, and
detrimental other times.
I guess, in the end, I might never use this feature myself, even if
it
was added. I find the currently available tools much simpler.
Any other thoughts on this?
David
Michael
On Sep 25, 2008, at 8:52 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Michael Latta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
The problem I have with this reasoning is that the point of
plain text
stories is to get more stakeholder involvement. Being able to
express
shared content in plain text allows the non-programmer reader to
verify
more
details (for example UI interactions within a high level
story). I would
like to be able to express the high level intent of the scenario
and then
(still in readable english like text) describe the UI
interactions for
each
step, or the business logic details, or what ever should be
verified by
the
customer to be correct about the details. Saying "you can
always use
ruby"
assumes the audience is programmers.
I think you misunderstand what I wrote. I made no such
assumption. I
said very specifically that this was audience dependent and that if
you're audience is customers you can look at it one way, but if
it's
just developers you can use the Ruby tools. I can see why you
might be
confused by "If you're a developer" rather than "if your audience
is
all developers," but that was the intent.
In terms of ways of sharing content, there is some interesting
discussion going on around Cucumber, which will replace Story
Runner.
Have a look at these:
http://blog.davidchelimsky.net/2008/9/22/cucumber
http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/16211/tickets/3
Please feel free to join the conversation there, or on this list.
Cheers,
David
In most cases this is not the case for
several levels of detail on the kinds of projects I am working.
Michael
On Jun 24, 2008, at 2:31 PM, Rick DeNatale wrote:
On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 3:00 PM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
On Jun 24, 2008, at 1:54 PM, Yi Wen wrote:
In David's presentation @ RailsConf, he has this example:
Story: measure progress towards registration goals
As a conference organizer
I want to see a report of registrations
So that I can measure progress towards registration goals
Scenario: one registration shows as 1%
Given a goal of 200 registrations
When 1 attendee registers
Then the goal should be 1% achieved
Scenario: one registration less than the goal shows as 99%
Given a goal of 200 registrations
When 199 attendees register
Then the goal should be 99% achieved
Notice that Given part is exactly the same for both scenarios.
Does it
possible to DRY up it a little bit by putting Given up to
right after
Story part? Or it is just too crazy?
Depends on who the audience is. If you're using plain text w/
customers,
yes it's crazy. The whole point is to keep things non-
programatic.
If you're a developer, then write the stuff in pure Ruby and
you have
plenty of language-tools to DRY things up to your heart's
content.
Or leave the plain-text MOIST* and rejoice in the fact that the
step can
be
shared and therefor DRY things up.
*MOIST = More Obvious In Simple Text
--
Rick DeNatale
My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
