On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 2:11 AM, Sven <sv...@delirium.ch> wrote: > describe Weather, ".fetch for zipcode" do > > before(:each) do > �...@weather = Weather.fetch_for_zipcode(98117) > end > > it "should populate zipcode" > > it "should populate temperature units" > > it "should populate recorded at" > > end > > With rspec-1.2.0 this will result in 3 failing tests (as fetch_for_zipcode is > not yet implemented), whereas in the original screencast it caused the three > expectations to be reported as pending - which makes more sense to me.
No one asked me, but I think the new way is better. If I write code, it should be correct. If I didn't care if the call to fetch_for_zipcode was correct, I'd comment it out, mock it out, or just not write it in the first place. In general, I write before() after I write the examples, since I usually consider it just a DRY refactoring. ///ark _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users