On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Tim Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since Cucumber is about BDD and defining the "acceptable and desired > behavior" of the software through plain english (executable > requirements if you will) it is not always clear what "level" the > steps will implement. > > In the case of Rails testing out of the box this maps roughly to: > 1) unit tests - models > 2) functional tests - controllers > 3) integration tests - multiple controllers/models > > In Cucumber we're not really drawing those lines so clearly and tests > will draw on some or more of each of these levels. > > Is this accurate?
The general recommendation is that Cucumber replaces rails integration tests and RSpec replaces rails functional and unit tests. HTH, David > > Thanks, > > Tim > > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Pat Maddox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> James Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> Ben Mabey wrote: >>> >>>> Right. Although, I'm unsure if rspec is even the default framework >>>> outside of the rails generators. >>>> -Ben >>> >>> Where can one get a handy quick reference of what syntax is acceptable >>> to cucumber by default? >> >> <cheeky>Ruby syntax is acceptable</cheeky> >> >> Pat >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
