On 20 Aug 2010, at 06:40, Myron Marston wrote: > describe VCR::HttpStubbingAdapters::FakeWeb do > it_should_behave_like 'an http stubbing adapter', ['net/http'], > [:method, :uri, :host] > end > > describe VCR::HttpStubbingAdapters::WebMock do > it_should_behave_like 'an http stubbing adapter', %w[net/http patron > httpclient em-http-request], [:method, :uri, :host, :body, :headers] > end
Neat! I'm interested to see applications of parameterised shared examples. I'd certainly never thought of defining optional features in that way. > So...how should we deal with this? A few ideas come to mind: > > 1. Find a better way to fake module_exec on ruby 1.8.6. I'm not sure > if this is even doable. > 2. Leave things as they are...but I don't like this idea since the > error message is fairly cryptic. > 3. Rescue the error and raise a more clear error message. > 4. Rescue the error and print a warning. > > I lean towards #4, because the #module_eval is only necessary to > extract the instance method definitions. 4 makes sense to me iff the code does actually run correctly in all circumstances, otherwise I'd lean towards 3. 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
