On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 8:44 PM, James Byrne <li...@ruby-forum.com> wrote:
> I have been working under the impression that that tests/step > definitions worked on a simple boolean logic and behaved like ruby > methods, the last value is returned. Thus, in my understanding, if the > return value is true then the step definition passed. if it was false, > then the step definition failed. > The return value from a step definition means nothing. Where did you get the impression that it did? Is there anywhere in the Wiki that hints to this that we need to fix? > > However, in trying to determine why a simple boolean value returned from > the database did not seem to influence the test result I discovered > this: > > # This always passes!!! > When /any matcher you want/ do > false > end > > # This, on the other hand, always fails. > When /any matcher you want/ do > fail > end. > > Was I truly fundamentally wrong in my previous belief that test results > are boolean true and false values? If so, where exactly is this laid > out in the API because I missed it entirely. Return values aren't mentioned anywhere in the Wiki as far as I know, which means they are not significant. Step definitions fail for precisely the same reason that Test::Unit, JUnit, NUnit, xUnit methods and RSpec "it" blocks do - when an exception is raised. Since this is such a common idiom I guess noone thought it required a specific mention. Please give me a pointer to a relevant page where you'd expect to see this mentioned explicitly and I'll make it clear in the Wiki. Aslak > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.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
