Actually, now that I think about it, Spork claims the Kernel#debugger method before Rspec checks if it should install it's catch, so it might be fine.
Still, I would prefer if if the above "require 'ruby-debug'; debugger" convention still worked. Tim On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Tim Harper <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not exactly sure what the motivation behind the "debugger" catch was, > perhaps a convenience method to allow your code to remain littered with > debugger statements? At any rate, it's obstructed my normal use of > ruby-debug, and regardless of whether I've passed the -d or --debug flag, it > still complains that the debugger is ignored unless if I use the rdebug > wrapper. > > > require 'ruby-debug'; debugger # <- does not work under rspec 2.0, > regardless if -d or --debug was provided > > # ^ This is how you use the debugger with spork, effectively > > >
_______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
