Hi
I finally looked into why this is not currently possibly in RSpec 2 (beta 19):
shared_examples_for "Etymology" do
describe "The etymology of foo" do
it "is followed by #{after_foo}" do
# ...
end
end
end
describe "foo", focus: true do
it_should_behave_like "Etymology" do
def self.after_foo
"bar"
end
end
end
It's because of the current implementation of
ExampleGroup.define_shared_group_method, which evaluates the shared example
block before the customisation block:
shared_group = describe("#{report_label} \#{name}", &shared_block)
shared_group.class_eval(&customization_block) if customization_block
(This is behaviour I found surprising.)
However, with a little more metaprogramming jiggery-pokery, you can have them
evaluated in the other order:
module RSpec
module Core
class ExampleGroup
# ...
def self.define_shared_group_method(new_name, report_label=nil)
report_label = "it should behave like" unless report_label
module_eval(<<-END_RUBY, __FILE__, __LINE__)
def self.#{new_name}(name, &customization_block)
shared_block = world.shared_example_groups[name]
raise "Could not find shared example group named
\#{name.inspect}" unless shared_block
compound_block = lambda do |*args|
module_eval &customization_block if customization_block
module_eval &shared_block
end
shared_group = describe("#{report_label} \#{name}",
&compound_block)
shared_group
end
END_RUBY
end
# ...
end
end
end
Would this be a useful improvement to RSpec 2? Any opinions on the order of
the block evaluation for shared examples?
Cheers
Ash
--
http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
