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
