On May 8, 10:50 am, David Chelimsky <dchelim...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is pretty helpful, thanks for a more thorough explanation. I did
> add your patch locally, however, and it doesn't seem to solve the
> problem (I still get undefined method `ok?' when I run the example in
> your 2nd post).
Sorry. It didn't work because I didn't have subject {self} there.> > I need to think about this some more before I agree to go in this > direction, as I want to make sure there are no negative impacts that > I'm not thinking of right now. That said, I'd need a patch w/ specs > that fail without this change and pass with this change. Please file a > ticket athttp://rspec.lighthouseapp.comw/ a patch. Ok, will do that later. > > Cheers, > David > > > I have also another question: why the should and should_not methods in > > Spec::Example::Subject::ExampleMethods have this if statement anyway? > > I mean, the matcher argument has it's default value as nil and it is > > also as nil on Kernel#should(_not) method so this if doesn't make > > sense to me. Can't it just be written as subject.should(matcher)? Or > > is it just some code block which is written like that because of some > > 3rd party tools? > > Good point - thanks! > :http://github.com/dchelimsky/rspec/commit/b061f9f40dc8a29d34ddb3e7442... :) Cheers, Jarmo _______________________________________________ rspec-users mailing list rspec-users@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
