On 30 Aug 2008, at 19:31, Scott Taylor wrote:
On Aug 30, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Tero Tilus wrote:
2008-08-30 17:02, Matt Wynne:
RuBehave
Now _that's_ cool! I love it!
Personally, I always liked the rbehave / rspec combo, of Mike Myers
& Ali G.
Scott
:)
One of the main adoption barrier
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 6:56 AM, Matt Wynne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 30 Aug 2008, at 19:31, Scott Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 30, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Tero Tilus wrote:
>>
>>> 2008-08-30 17:02, Matt Wynne:
RuBehave
>>>
>>> Now _that's_ cool! I love it!
>>
>> Personally, I always lik
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 1:37 PM, Dan North <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At the risk of being a bit controversial...
>
> 2008/8/24 David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> [...]
>>
>> Sadly, "spec" has just as much baggage, if not more, as "test" does.
>> These days we're calling these things "code exa
On Aug 31, 2008, at 7:56 AM, Matt Wynne wrote:
On 30 Aug 2008, at 19:31, Scott Taylor wrote:
On Aug 30, 2008, at 2:12 PM, Tero Tilus wrote:
2008-08-30 17:02, Matt Wynne:
RuBehave
Now _that's_ cool! I love it!
Personally, I always liked the rbehave / rspec combo, of Mike
Myers & Ali
On Aug 31, 2008, at 9:39 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
Agreed. Stories and/or Features seem to be more about organization and
communication. Scenarios drive code development.
+1
I also like to organize them into workflows, tasks, goals
Which makes me think maybe the scenario should be a more ind
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 9:02 AM, Jonathan Linowes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 31, 2008, at 9:39 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
>
>> Agreed. Stories and/or Features seem to be more about organization and
>> communication. Scenarios drive code development.
>
> +1
> I also like to organize them
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my search
terms are too generic (spec and require...).
I am writing ruby code that runs under jruby in an embedded
environment. Periodically I will install new code that passes all
specs only to have it fail when it can't find a ne
On 30 Aug 2008, at 19:56, Ashley Moran wrote:
On Aug 30, 2008, at 4:58 pm, Matt Wynne wrote:
I have been in a few pub conversations now about 'photoshop-driven-
development' where we show the machine what the page should look
like (a photoshop mock-up), and keeps failing the build until we
Could you put a mocking expectation on Kernel? (which is where
#require is defined)
Kernel.should_receive(:require).with(expected_file_name)
On 31 Aug 2008, at 15:36, Chuck Remes wrote:
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my
search terms are too generic (spec and re
On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Remes wrote:
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my
search terms are too generic (spec and require...).
I am writing ruby code that runs under jruby in an embedded
environment. Periodically I will install new code that passes all
I've been giving this some thought, I've not had the chance to test it
out yet,
but here are my examples:
--
it "should add a 'it' test" do
example_group = Class.new(Spec::Example::ExampleGroup)
example_group.should_receive(:it).with(...) ...
example.class_eval do
describe_model_attribu
On Aug 31, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Scott Taylor wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Remes wrote:
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my
search terms are too generic (spec and require...).
I am writing ruby code that runs under jruby in an embedded
environment.
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Chuck Remes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Aug 31, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Scott Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Remes wrote:
>>
>>> I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my search
>>> terms are too generic (spec and req
On Aug 31, 2008, at 2:58 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Sun, Aug 31, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Chuck Remes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 12:42 PM, Scott Taylor wrote:
On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Remes wrote:
I looked through the mailing list archive but unfortunately my
14 matches
Mail list logo