Interested to see my blog post name-dropped here.
Philip, I assume you're the original assert{ 2.0 } Philip, yes?
http://www.oreillynet.com/ruby/blog/2008/02/assert2.html
I actually had thought that project was in stasis. I'm the only
person I know using assert{ 2.0 }, but I do love it. The assert{ }
syntax along with the useful failure output is a big win.
Looks like you're adding on to that puppy - cool. Sadly, I haven't
written an assert_select for a long while, so assert_xhtml isn't
solving any pain points at this time. But I'll still happily go on
using assert{ 2.0 } as is!
--
Barry
http://bjhess.com
http://www.getharvest.com
On Apr 7, 7:51 am, Phlip <[email protected]> wrote:
> Colin Law wrote:
> > This seems to work
> > *http://bjhess.com/blog/2008/04/27/five-rails-tips/
>
> > *found by google for assert_layout
>
> I like this section:
>
> > The flexibility of assert_select:
>
> > Did you know you can use regular expressions with assert_select? It’s
> > pretty fun. Here’s a selector to verify a page does not include any table
> > rows with ids of the form “day_entry_#”.
> > assert_select "tr[id*=?]", /day_entry_\d+/, :count => 0
>
> It's the same as...
>
> assert_xhtml{ without!{ tr :id => /day_entry_\d+/ } }
>
> I would really be interested to learn of an assert_select whichassert_xhtml
> cannot do...
>
> --
> Phlip
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Talk" 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 this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
