Why don't you open the class, and set the constant like so:
class TheClass
CONSTANT = 'value_it_should_have_for_the_current_spec'
end
This worked for me.
Marcelo.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Nick Hoffman wrote:
> On 2008-10-16, at 15:12, Craig Demyanovich wrote:
>
>> Cool. Having seen
On 2008-10-16, at 15:12, Craig Demyanovich wrote:
Cool. Having seen something a little more concrete, I like your
design decisions. In this case, I'd go with Scott's recommendation
of hiding the constant behind a method.
Regards,
Craig
Thanks for taking a look, Craig, and giving me your op
Cool. Having seen something a little more concrete, I like your design
decisions. In this case, I'd go with Scott's recommendation of hiding the
constant behind a method.
Regards,
Craig
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyfo
On 2008-10-15, at 21:59, Craig Demyanovich wrote:
Since class A is coupled to class B, the specs for A are also
coupled to class B through class A. Thus, I wouldn't worry about the
coupling. Why does a method of class A directly access a constant of
class B? Does the constant belong in class
On Oct 15, 2008, at 4:31 PM, Nick Hoffman wrote:
Hi guys. One of my methods uses a constant in another method, like
this:
class A
def something
"foo: #{B::BAR}"
end
end
When writing the spec for A#something , how would you mock or stub
#{B::BAR}, and how would you set an expe
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 8:47 PM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-10-15, at 16:39, Craig Demyanovich wrote:
>
>> Probably, I would just check the outcome of the method instead of checking
>> interaction with a constant.
>>
>> Craig
>>
>
> So you guys wouldn't worry about the spec
On 2008-10-15, at 16:39, Craig Demyanovich wrote:
Probably, I would just check the outcome of the method instead of
checking interaction with a constant.
Craig
So you guys wouldn't worry about the spec for class A being coupled to
this constant in class B?
-Nick
__
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Craig Demyanovich
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Probably, I would just check the outcome of the method instead of checking
> interaction with a constant.
>
What he said,
--
Zach Dennis
http://www.continuousthinking.com
http://www.mutuallyhuman.com
Probably, I would just check the outcome of the method instead of checking
interaction with a constant.
Craig
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
