Hey Ben,
That makes perfect sense. Thanks for pointing out the error because I
don't think I would've been able to figure it out.
Thanks, as well, for the stubbing/mocking tip. I will keep my eyes open
for that in the future.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Chris Olsen wrote:
> I had an error that I couldn't figure out, then when writing up a
> question for the forum I figured it out. The thing is I don't
> understand why the change that was made works and why what existed
> before didn't.
>
> Here is the initial post when I had the error:
>
lawl, David has been out of the loop a few e-mails.I left in an extra line.
Thanks for the expansion Ben, adds much more clarity,
On Jan 29, 2008 8:03 PM, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2008 6:55 PM, Andrew WC Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > try it, does the same th
On Jan 29, 2008 4:03 PM, Rick DeNatale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> in my latest blog posting
> :http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/articles/2008/01/29/why-i-dont-mind-using-rspec-in-fact-ive-come-to-love-it
Nice. And thanks!
David
>
> --
> Rick DeNatale
>
> My blog on Ruby
> http://talklikeadu
On Jan 29, 2008 6:55 PM, Andrew WC Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> try it, does the same thing ='(
Shouldn't be the exact same thing. What's the whole error?
Also - what version of rspec? If trunk, do you have the latest (3268)?
>
>
>
> On Jan 29, 2008 7:49 PM, Shane Mingins <[EMAIL PROTECTED
On Jan 29, 2008 8:48 PM, James B. Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Message-ID:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:47:41 -0500, "Andrew WC Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > I've seen lambda before but not sure what it does.
>
> A lambda is a fancy name for an anonymous or unbou
Message-ID:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:47:41 -0500, "Andrew WC Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> I've seen lambda before but not sure what it does.
A lambda is a fancy name for an anonymous or unbound function. Its
significance comes from the fact that it is completely statele
Sematics.. the method is never returning an error, it raises one. So
you can't say @audience.stats="dsfds" and expect to see an exception
returned right?
Since an exception is being raised you have to think of another way of
testing it aside from checking it's return value... So you could do
So if I understand correctly,
The following didn't raise an error:
@audience.stats = 'Market Goblin'
@audience.stats.should raise_error
because audience.stats didn't return an error.
Where as lambda will return an error.
On Jan 29, 2008 10:58 PM, Ben Mabey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew W
Andrew WC Brown wrote:
> oh, I left in:
>
> it "should return an error when passed a string" do
> @audience.stats = 'Market Goblin'
> lambda [EMAIL PROTECTED] = 'Market Goblin'}.should raise_error
> end
>
> when yours is:
>
> it "should return an error when passed a string" do
>
I love rspec. I wish the magic extended to ruby 1.9 so I could start
looking at 1.9 with spec support. I'd rather not learn bacon + mocha
just to work with 1.9, only to port back to rspec once 1.9 support is
done. Just my $0.02 though.
On Jan 29, 2008 4:26 PM, Corey Haines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot
oh, I left in:
it "should return an error when passed a string" do
@audience.stats = 'Market Goblin'
lambda [EMAIL PROTECTED] = 'Market Goblin'}.should raise_error
end
when yours is:
it "should return an error when passed a string" do
lambda [EMAIL PROTECTED] = 'Market Gobli
-1*
I upgraded a Rails project from rspec 0.9 to 1.1.2 -- and this change caused
me some pain. Luckily, I figured it out and confirmed it here on the list
before things got too bad. :)
* That said, I have to admit that I'm not super-pleased about my helper
methods that start with should_ -- they p
I had an error that I couldn't figure out, then when writing up a
question for the forum I figured it out. The thing is I don't
understand why the change that was made works and why what existed
before didn't.
Here is the initial post when I had the error:
--
In th
H
I just ran this and 2 examples, 0 failures
class Audience
attr_accessor :stats
def initialize(name = nil,value = nil)
@name ||= 'all'
@value ||= value
end
def stats=(flux)
@stats = @value * flux / 0.025
end
def market_share
"The Market share is for [EMAIL PR
try it, does the same thing ='(
On Jan 29, 2008 7:49 PM, Shane Mingins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are you looking for something like this
> lambda { @audience.stats = 'Market Goblin' }.should raise_error
>
>
> On 30/01/2008, at 1:48 PM, Andrew WC Brown wrote:
>
> Trying to spec the following bu
Are you looking for something like this
lambda { @audience.stats = 'Market Goblin' }.should raise_error
On 30/01/2008, at 1:48 PM, Andrew WC Brown wrote:
Trying to spec the following but don't know if I'm using the right
matcher.
How do I spec? Plz, sugar on tops.
Audience.stats
- should h
Trying to spec the following but don't know if I'm using the right matcher.
How do I spec? Plz, sugar on tops.
Audience.stats
- should have a stats of 80 when passed a flux of 10
- should return an error when passed a string (ERROR - 1)
1)
TypeError in 'Audience.stats should return an error when
Warning - bit of a ramble below!
On 29/01/2008, Edvard Majakari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Not if you fill it out...and the BDD way is to write one example at a
> > time, not a complete spec beforehand.
>
> I've done it this way too (being lazy), but is it really good thing?
> Often I get mo
Very nice post, Rick.
I, too, would like to hear what people mean when they say it is too
"magical." I kind of like the magic. :)
-Corey
On Jan 29, 2008 5:03 PM, Rick DeNatale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> in my latest blog posting
> :
> http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/articles/2008/01/29/why
in my latest blog posting
:http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/articles/2008/01/29/why-i-dont-mind-using-rspec-in-fact-ive-come-to-love-it
--
Rick DeNatale
My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@ruby
On Jan 29, 2008 5:43 AM, Edvard Majakari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Not if you fill it out...and the BDD way is to write one example at a
> > time, not a complete spec beforehand.
>
> I've done it this way too (being lazy), but is it really good thing?
> Often I get more insight on how an inter
Another approach to what Pat mentioned is would be to use a presenter
approach. We use presenters to encapsulate view logic and they often
hide (or delegate) functionality to one or more models based on the UI
component you're focusing on.
This route doesn't muck up your models with things that ma
> Not if you fill it out...and the BDD way is to write one example at a
> time, not a complete spec beforehand.
I've done it this way too (being lazy), but is it really good thing?
Often I get more insight on how an interface should look like,
if I think even superficially what kinds of services a
24 matches
Mail list logo
