Thanks for making the other fixes! I don't have a 'have_tag' example handy (replaced all the instances with more compact with_tag syntax).. I'll try to get to it later today and send it to you personally. =N
On Feb 11, 8:40 pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 2:52 PM, nat...@pivotalsf.com <nwil...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > On Feb 10, 8:49 pm, David Chelimsky <dchelim...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Nathan Wilmes <nat...@pivotallabs.com> > >> wrote: > >> > (3) with_tag is completely broken, as it tries to use the outer class as > >> > the > >> > subject of 'with_tag', rather than the have_tag matcher that it lives > >> > inside. > > >> Was it working before and the upgrade broke existing specs? Or is this > >> a general observation? > > > Yes, the upgrade broke existing specs.. it used to work fine as of > > rspec 1.1.4. > > The breakage appears to have something to do with the 'subject' > > functionality. > > Nathan, > > Taking a closer look at this - before we introduced the implicit > subject, nested with_tag and without_tags were passing in the > ExampleGroup. The matcher was (and still is) ignoring that argument, > and using the HTML it got from the have_tag call. > > There are also a number of specs in rspec's own suite that show that > this works correctly. These pass against rails 2.0.5, 2.1.2, 2.2.2, > 2.3.0 and edge (as of earlier today). > > Take a look > athttp://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec-rails/blob/333810bf6f062599bd39007... > and scroll down to 289, for example. > > Can you show me an example of what's failing for you? Spec and subject > code, and the failure message? > > Thanks, > David > _______________________________________________ > 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
