On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 1:29 PM, Perry Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Dec 16, 2012, at 7:34 AM, David Chelimsky wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Perry Smith <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Below are two methods of doing the same thing in a view spec. I have some >>> hidden magic to tie in to capybara which I am not showing. >> >> First question: why lay another abstraction on top of what is already >> an abstraction for spec'ing html content? > > Thank you for both replies. I got everything except the above... I'm not > clear what you mean by the 2nd abstraction layer. I thought I was just using > the tools provided as they were intended to be used.
You wrote "I have some hidden magic to tie in to capybara which I am not showing." I thought that's what produced things like text_box[:name], but maybe that's all from Nokogiri? > > One thing I thought about later is a lot of my mistakes of the past would be > caught by Cucumber / integration tests. In particular, the forms and fields > have to match up with what is in the routes. Integration tests is the place > to catch that since I am going to want integration tests anyway. It won't > catch the labels but, as you just taught me, there are simpler ways to do > that than what I've done. > > Thank you again. I also hope there are more replies. > Perry > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "rspec" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rspec" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
