sorry.. the first point.. you're right this feature is to do with tables too, however this feature is orthogonal to the other one, so I decided to start a new thread ... I hope that was right. Cheers Nigel
2009/4/23 Nigel Thorne <rs...@nigelthorne.com> > Hi Kero.. > > I agree that in defining the rules that define the behaviour those > situations are equivalent. > > However, as the examples _are the tests_ we need both as we need to test > both those scenarios so the testers have confidence the feature is working > in all situations. > > It's being a really good experience in my current project to work so > closely with the test team. I'm getting some really good feedback. > > Cheers > Nigel > > 2009/4/23 Kero van Gelder <k...@chello.nl> > > > In Cucumber I want to remove duplication from my examples tables. >> > see http://gist.github.com/99516 for an example of the type of >> situation I >> > am facing. >> > >> > I would like the second example to be equivalent to the first. >> > >> > To do this... I need cucumber to read a row in the examples and notice >> the >> > 'options', then run it as if it were several rows in the table, one for >> each >> > possible combination of options. >> > >> > Anyone else find this useful? .. or got any suggestions for better ways >> of >> > doing it? >> >> 1) See another current thread in this list: [Cucumber] Tables >> 2) [new|expired] does not matter, so you don't need the column at all >> you can put two checks in the step definition, I think. >> perhaps this allows you to write the remaining steps in another way, >> without duplication of steps. >> >> Bye, >> Kero. >> ___ >> How can I change the world if I can't even change myself? >> -- Faithless, Salva Mea >> _______________________________________________ >> rspec-users mailing list >> rspec-users@rubyforge.org >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users >> > >
_______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
