On Nov 10, 2008, at 12:21 am, Greg Hauptmann wrote:
Ashley - what's you're recommendation re using BigDecimal (which does
work as you point out) and the Money gem (which it sounds like makes a
dev's life a bit easier)??? Is it worth trying to port an application
from use of BigDecimal to Money
On Nov 07, 2008, at 5:24 pm, Shot (Piotr Szotkowski) wrote:
Right, that’s why I suggested I could Kernel#eval the binary’s
contents
in the current process instead. This would require tricking Trollop,
but
I assume I could trick it by hand-crafting ARGV.
You might find Rick Bradley's talk[
I know that it's possible to run a single spec example (IE: #it block)
with the -e option for script/spec . Is it possible to run an entire
context (IE: #describe block)?
Cheers,
Nick
___
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rub
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I know that it's possible to run a single spec example (IE: #it block) with
> the -e option for script/spec . Is it possible to run an entire context (IE:
> #describe block)?
>
Use the -l option to specify the line number
On 2008-11-10, at 14:06, Mark Wilden wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I know that it's possible to run a single spec example (IE: #it
block) with the -e option for script/spec . Is it possible to run an
entire context (IE: #describe block)?
U
I'm writing specs to check that certain user types are authorised to
access certain controller actions. In addition to writing specs for
authorised user types and for users who aren't logged-in, I feel that
I should write specs for all of the other user types. However, the
number of example
I'm not sure what platform you're on, or if this is what you're after, but
the .autospec I use on the Mac uses the built in speech stuff to say what
happens at the end of an autotest run. So, it tells me things like "all
tests passed", or "tests passed" (depends on whether or not it ran the full
s
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-11-10, at 14:06, Mark Wilden wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> I know that it's possible to run a single spec example (IE: #it block)
>> with the -e option f
On 2008-11-10, at 17:12, Mark Wilden wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 1:26 PM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 2008-11-10, at 14:06, Mark Wilden wrote:
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I know that it's possible to run a single spec example (IE
I'm on Mac too - so it may be as simple as changing the Growl
Preferences to get this working then?
(assuming I'm using vanilla Rspec gem).
I've also customised (copy/pasted from a recommendation) my
~/.autotest file. Is this an issue? Does this file actually get
used now I'm using RSpec and ".
Hey guys. I've told one of my controllers to not render a layout for a
certain action:
layout false, :only => :map_info_window
Now I'm trying to spec that, but this:
it 'should not render a layout' do
controller.expect_render :layout
do_get
end
fails with this:
Spec::Mocks::Moc
On Nov 10, 2008, at 6:03 PM, Greg Hauptmann wrote:
I'm on Mac too - so it may be as simple as changing the Growl
Preferences to get this working then?
(assuming I'm using vanilla Rspec gem).
One easy way is to use qp - a command line utility for playing
QuickTIme sounds. It's been removed f
Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm writing specs to check that certain user types are authorised to
> access certain controller actions. In addition to writing specs for
> authorised user types and for users who aren't logged-in, I feel that
> I should write specs for all of the other
13 matches
Mail list logo
