On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:45 PM, Elliot Winkler <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Phillip Koebbe <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Here's another idea that's not so great, but maybe it will spur some >> thinking in someone else. What about a custom generator (or a flag on the >> official one) that added something like a shebang line at the beginning of >> example files. A short comment that identifies the file, like "# RSpec". >> Then a TM bundle could pick up on that and be happy. > > Putting aside the fact that this is solving a very specific problem.... what > about #!/usr/bin/env spec ? 99% of the time the shebang won't be used, I'd > wager, so it'd pretty much be harmless.
As I tried to point out, textmate looks for shebang lines to compare against in the language definitions. Right now the rspec bundle doesn't have a language definition since rspec files are really ruby files and want to use that language definition. I guess I just don't see what's wrong with using the convention of naming spec files with the suffix _spec.rb as Mr. Textmate suggests http://blog.macromates.com/2007/file-type-detection-rspec-rails/ It's worked well for me for quite some time. -- Rick DeNatale Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ Github: http://github.com/rubyredrick Twitter: @RickDeNatale WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
