This is the same error that I get also. I'd love to get this working,
Glenn
On Oct 31, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Nick Hoffman wrote:
On 2008-10-31, at 17:52, Matt Darby wrote:
Same thing unfortunately. It also happens when I add --drb to spec/
spec.opts and run autotest/autospec as well.
G'day
Works for me! However I have a feature request. Currently I exclude
certain files like so:
Autotest.add_hook :initialize do |at|
%w{this_kind that_kind .git vendor .blah}.each {|exception|
at.add_exception(exception)}
end
Will there be a way to do something like this with RSpactor? I
On Apr 9, 2008, at 5:04 PM, Pat Maddox wrote:
On 4/9/08, Ashley Moran [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9 Apr 2008, at 14:14, aslak hellesoy wrote:
Just a style comment: I usually strive for a single When (in this
case
Fred uploads the csv file).
The other ones are Givens.
Hmm, I've
This actually sounds more confusing to me when viewed in the context
of my own stories, and it seems similar to what's going on here. I
write a lot about the user's interaction with the site and what
should
happen, so I have a lot of stories that look like:
Given database is in this
While my approach might not be the best, since I don't
stub :login_required, it still serves me well. I would do something
like this:
user = mock_model(User, :operator = true)
controller.stub!(:current_user).and_return(user)
login_required will find the 'current_user' and be happy. I don't
I'm guessing the key is inside find_account_by_subdomain_or_url. Do
you have that defined somewhere? It probably calls something like:
@account = Account.find_by_subdomain(blah) or Account.find_by_url(blah)
In which case that's probably what you need to stub. Nothing is
actually checking
I think the general consensus is that if you need this feature, then
you have ugly code that needs cleaning up :) If you're in a situation
like me, where you're too noob to figure out a better solution for
some legacy code that you inherited, go to this url and find the
instructions for
Hey all! I'm loving Stories so far, but I ran across a difficult
error today that I felt should have resulted in a PENDING message.
Here's what I got:
/Users/Malohkan/Sites/blog/vendor/plugins/rspec_on_rails/lib/spec/
rails/../../../../rspec/lib/spec/story/runner/scenario_runner.rb:11:in
which
should have been GivenScenario. I guess I'm full of typos today!
Glenn
On Mar 31, 2008, at 11:34 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Glenn Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hey all! I'm loving Stories so far, but I ran across a difficult
error
today that I
Hi all! I've been through the RSpec Stories PeepCode and some various
other readings online, and now I'm trying to build a dummy application
of the traditional style: log in, make posts, add comments.
So I've run the scaffold for posts/comments and the script for
RestfulAuthentication so I
On Mar 26, 2008, at 6:28 PM, Chuck Remes wrote:
On Mar 26, 2008, at 4:02 PM, Glenn Ford wrote:
Hi all! I've been through the RSpec Stories PeepCode and some
various
other readings online, and now I'm trying to build a dummy
application
of the traditional style: log in, make posts, add
doing a
redirect? A similar rspec test works for me.
--
Matt Berther
http://www.mattberther.com
On Mar 26, 2008, at 5:51 PM, Glenn Ford wrote:
On Mar 26, 2008, at 6:28 PM, Chuck Remes wrote:
On Mar 26, 2008, at 4:02 PM, Glenn Ford wrote:
Hi all! I've been through the RSpec Stories
That was it, thank you! Must have been a long day, I can't believe I
didn't spot that :)
On Mar 26, 2008, at 10:15 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Glenn Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all! I've been through the RSpec Stories PeepCode and some
various
other
that
feature is working, that spec is green, plain and simple. I admit I
may be ignorant to a lot of the power behind RSpec, but I like this
level of simplicity and straightforwardness.
Glenn Ford
http://www.glennfu.com
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec
On Mar 19, 2008, at 1:03 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 10:42 AM, Glenn Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[Big Snip]
There are a few bad assumptions in your colleague's response, so to
set the record straight:
* test coverage and tests which use the interaction-based
I have a similar perspective from my own personal experience. I am
still quite the novice, but I'm as much of a novice in RSpec as I am
in Ruby / RoR. Honestly, a lot of my specs in new sections end up
having great coverage, but are full of real models and few of the
purist BDD
Here's the steps I followed:
Generated the test code
rails test
mate test
cd test
script/generate scaffold thing
rake db:create
script/server
Modified things_controller.rb index and new:
def index
end
def new
session[:user] = 5
redirect_to(things_path)
end
Set index.html.erb
this totally irrelevant to RSpec in
every way?
On 1/2/08, Glenn Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's the steps I followed:
Generated the test code
rails test
mate test
cd test
script/generate scaffold thing
rake db:create
script/server
Modified things_controller.rb index and new:
def index
-1
I, as a new rspec user, did not find the switch between test_ and it
blah do to be even a small challenge compared to other things I had
to convert and learn. I only feel like it would be one more thing to
keep up with that would cause problems. I can certainly see someone
writing a
I have this code trying to ensure my reset method works. I want to
make sure all the participants have their destroy method called.
# in my spec for Room
r = Room.new(:name = 'bob')
r.save
p = Participant.new(:login = 'a', :password =
'b', :password_confirmation = 'b')
On Nov 15, 2007, at 2:03 PM, Pat Maddox wrote:
On Nov 15, 2007 10:50 AM, Glenn Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have this code trying to ensure my reset method works. I want to
make sure
all the participants have their destroy method called.
# in my spec for Room r = Room.new(:name
I run my suite of tests, one test fails.
I run that one test file, no tests fail.
Something is carrying over between files and I can't figure out what.
I tracked down the problem to the very line it's occurring on, with
printouts before and after every call to make sure I know exactly what
That was exactly what I needed, thanks a lot!
Glenn
On Nov 9, 2007, at 10:59 AM, Dan North wrote:
Hi Glenn.
On Nov 8, 2007 4:01 PM, Glenn Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems that what I'm coming to understand of the direction of this
story concept is that there is a lot of emphasis being
It seems that what I'm coming to understand of the direction of this
story concept is that there is a lot of emphasis being put on ensuring
we keep things at the business level. I can appreciate the elegance
of it certainly, but when I think of what I would really want to gain
from this
24 matches
Mail list logo
