On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
> Could you give both errors a common base class, then assert on that?
>
That's the winning solution. Thanks!
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listin
On 10 Mar 2013, at 02:04, Robert Poor wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Adam Sroka wrote:
> It depends on what you really mean:
>
> 1) If you care that it is either OneError or OtherError, then these are two
> separate scenarios and should be written as such.
>
> 2) If you don't care
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Samer Masry wrote:
> It would be better to split that into two tests that test when each error
> is raised.
>
Except that the specific error that I receive depends on the ordering of
the data in the database, which isn't something I control. Hmm -- as I
stare at
It would be better to split that into two tests that test when each error is
raised.
On Mar 9, 2013, at 4:24 PM, Adam Sroka wrote:
> It depends on what you really mean:
>
> 1) If you care that it is either OneError or OtherError, then these are two
> separate scenarios and should be written
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Adam Sroka wrote:
> It depends on what you really mean:
>
> 1) If you care that it is either OneError or OtherError, then these are
> two separate scenarios and should be written as such.
>
> 2) If you don't care which one it is, then you probably just be less
> sp
It depends on what you really mean:
1) If you care that it is either OneError or OtherError, then these are two
separate scenarios and should be written as such.
2) If you don't care which one it is, then you probably just be less
specific. Is there a common message they respond to that you could
I'm expecting my_test to raise one error or another, but since I'm
pulling data from a db, I don't know which error it will be. Is there a
better way to write this?
expect { my_test }.to raise_error { |error|
error.should satisfy {|e|
e.instance_of?(OneError) || e.instance_of?(OtherError)
