On 8/6/07, Scott Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there some reason that pending() *MUST* take an argument?
There was no discussion of this when the feature was contributed.
Thinking about it now, to allow for no arg would require good default
messages - one for when there is a block and one
On Aug 6, 2007, at 7:19 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On 8/6/07, Scott Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there some reason that pending() *MUST* take an argument?
There was no discussion of this when the feature was contributed.
Thinking about it now, to allow for no arg would require good
On 8/6/07, Scott Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 6, 2007, at 7:19 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On 8/6/07, Scott Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there some reason that pending() *MUST* take an argument?
There was no discussion of this when the feature was contributed.
Is there some reason that pending() *MUST* take an argument?
Scott
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
