El 21/10/2007, a las 14:42, "David Chelimsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
escribió:
>
> On 10/21/07, Wincent Colaiuta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Not actually a big deal; seeing as the specs don't have any side-
>> effects and running them twice is harmless, and in any case getting
>> rid of the ne
On Oct 21, 2007, at 2:34 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:
> Please wait on this. As I said earlier this thread, there are too many
> moving parts right now. Story Runner is still very new (not yet
> released) and our plan is to use the Spec Runner formats for Story
> Runner so the output looks uniform
On 10/21/07, Ashley Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 21, 2007, at 1:42 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
> > That's how we do it because we don't have the facet facility. For now,
> > however, there are too many other moving parts to consider the
> > additional layer. I would definitely consi
On Oct 21, 2007, at 1:42 pm, David Chelimsky wrote:
> That's how we do it because we don't have the facet facility. For now,
> however, there are too many other moving parts to consider the
> additional layer. I would definitely consider it down the road.
That's ok, I was asking because I was ha
On 10/21/07, Ashley Moran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Oct 21, 2007, at 11:01 am, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>
> > And note that it's running the shared behaviours in this order:
> >
> >- 'one facet'
> >- 'some other facet'
> >- 'some other facet'
> >- 'one facet'
>
>
> On a simil
On Oct 21, 2007, at 11:01 am, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
> And note that it's running the shared behaviours in this order:
>
>- 'one facet'
>- 'some other facet'
>- 'some other facet'
>- 'one facet'
On a similar note, AGES ago, I promised to submit a patch for
something I ripped
On 10/21/07, Wincent Colaiuta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Given the following ApplicationController specs:
>
>describe ApplicationController, "one facet", :shared => true do
> it 'foo' ...
> it 'bar' ...
>end
>
>describe ApplicationController, "some other facet", :shared =>
>
On 21 Oct 2007, at 11:01, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
> Not actually a big deal; seeing as the specs don't have any side-
> effects and running them twice is harmless, and in any case getting
> rid of the nesting (putting all the specs in a single shared
> behaviour block) gets rid of the duplicate. Bu
