On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 7:37 PM, Stephen Eley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 4:51 PM, Zach Dennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I don't know if it damages the scenario as a whole. After all, the >> reason you're using tabular data in the first place is so you can >> re-use scenarios with different inputs. I would argue that using >> variable names in the scenarios that use tabular data makes it more >> readable. You can easily see where you are changing the inputs. > > I didn't say it damaged it.
Well you said sully, and that is defined as "damaging the purity or integrity of; defile". > Your logic is fine. It simply makes it > look less like an English prose sentence, and that's counter to the > aesthetic that's part of Rspec's/Cucumber's appeal to my personal > taste. > > Which I guess is less a strenuous objection, and more just to say: > Aslak, if this suggestion is officially implemented in Cucumber, > please make sure the current form continues to work too. Then those > of us who are persnickety fiction editors can continue doing things > the way we like them, and everybody wins. Based on your earlier email you mentioned you hadn't really grokked the tabular inputs of features, so I'm guessing you haven't been using the current form. I'm not asking to change how single scenarios are written. I am just asking for a more useful way to write scenarios which use tabular data inputs. The typical scenario wouldn't be affected by this. I like Ashley's idea of annotating the inputs. You could annotate only those that should be replaced with data from the tabular inputs. -- Zach Dennis http://www.continuousthinking.com http://www.mutuallyhuman.com _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
