Well sometimes one can't use an existing library becuase of some reason or other, like in my case not using ActiveRecord.
So I came up with yet another way to do it, I think it is a hyvrid between Fixtures and Factories. outlined here... http://blog.wolfman.com/posts/42 On Feb 7, 8:16 am, Jay Levitt <lists-rs...@shopwatch.org> wrote: > Scott Taylor wrote: > > > [ > > > "So my main objective with fixjour is to have the simplest > > implementation possible, with a very simple API. So it will create the > > following methods: new_[model], create_[model], and > > valid_[model]_attributes." > > This seems to be an anti-pattern in the Rails community: > > "I can't follow Library X, so I'll write Library Y, which is lightweight and > obeys YAGNI, and is the simplest possible implementation." > > I confess: I've done it too. But it's nearly always the wrong approach. If > you can't follow Library X's *implementation*, but you agree with its > *philosophies*, refactor it! > > Competing libraries should have different goals, different purposes, > different anything other than just "cleaner code". If Merb can refactor > itself into Rails, you can do it with fixtures, authentication, file > attachments, or what have you. As easy as Github makes forking, the choice > of libraries should no longer be driven by "this one was updated most > recently" or "this one uses the most recent design idioms". > > As someone wrote recently: The minute you start coding, you're writing > legacy code. > > Jay Levitt > > _______________________________________________ > rspec-users mailing list > rspec-us...@rubyforge.orghttp://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
