On 30 Jul 2010, at 10:00 PM, nruth wrote:
> http://gist.github.com/501296
>
> I don't think anything needs to change, though a wrapper function
> (each + an inner describe) might help flag it as a possible pitfall.
Hi Nick
I think the "before + ivar" pattern (below) is on its way out. At least, I
consider it deprecated in my head:
describe "before" do
before(:each) { @foo = "bar" }
before(:each) { @foo = "baz" }
it "does this" do
@foo.should eq "baz"
end
end
But the new syntax does indeed let you redefine `let` blocks.
describe "let" do
let(:foo) { "bar" }
let(:foo) { "baz" }
it "does this (currently)" do
foo.should eq "baz"
end
end
Arguably, this is not the most desirable behaviour, as it leads to
silent/confusing failures, as you've seen. Maybe it would be better if this
raised an error? (Which is only an option with `let`, not with ivars.)
Also, when combined with shared examples, this could conceivably be used to
violate the Liskov Substitution Principle (if the LSP applies to specs). While
Ruby as a language lets you redefine stuff at will, I'm not sure that's
appropriate here. I can't imagine wanting to redefine a let, instead of
factoring it out properly. Anyone got any thoughts on that?
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
