> I think "separate from the spec run" mislead you as to my intention here. > What I mean is that I don't want this to raise errors, but rather it > would be part of the output, just like pending and failed examples.
I'm OK with this idea. I just didn't want to have a separate file to read :). > I was resistant to the idea when it was simpler, but this additional > complexity makes me even moreso :) Fair enough. > Without getting into a debate about its relative merits, here's what > I'd really like to see: an API in the rspec-mocks framework that would > allow you to extend it to do all this in a separate gem. Then you > could build this, release it, refine it, etc. > > What do you think would be necessary in rspec-mocks to support that? I appreciate your willingness to make changes to RSpec to support 3rd party libraries...but I honestly think that the necessary changes to rspec-mocks for the API plus the separate gem would be far more work than just implementing a simple version of this (as you've suggested) in rspec mocks itself. Plus I doubt that a separate gem that did this one simple thing would get much use by other developers. Now that I understand that you just meant to have this print out a report as part of the main spec output, I'm completely satisfied with your suggestion. I'll start working on something in a branch and I'll see what I can come up with. Myron _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
