On Jan 31, 2011, at 3:38 AM, Evgeniy Dolzhenko wrote: > Btw. there is also before(:suite), and working from there wouldn't it make > sense to have > > 1. before(:suite) > 2. before(:group) > 3. before(:example) > > which would reflect the hierarchy of RSpec run (i.e. suite > group > example).
I really, really like this. It maps well to the afters as well, and therefore does not add to confusion the way :any would. > Anyway likely it's too late to introduce something like this, just my 2 > cents, because I'm from > these folks which were always confused about :each/:all and what is the > default, etc. when > I just started speccing. I don't think it's too late for this. I'm not convinced to do it yet, but I think this is a solid, clear direction. More opinions on this? _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
