[...@admin, @allowed_user].should all(be_allowed_to_visit(url))
[...@admin, @allowed_user].should all_be_allowed_to_visit(url)
I prefer the first so as not to introduce more "magic" but if it catches on
then moving to the second might be worthwhile.
Pat
On Dec 9, 2009, at 5:27 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 5:41 AM, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas
> <lboc...@yahoo.com.br> wrote:
> I was thinking that it would be great to add 2 additional methods to Object:
> should_all and should_none.
>
> The idea is that we would be able to write tests like:
>
> [...@admin, @allowed_user].should_all be_allowed_to_visit(url)
>
> [...@unprivileged, @non_welcome].should_none be_allowed_to_visit(url)
>
> Implementation is trivial, but I think that tests would become much cleaner
> than:
>
> [...@admin, @allowed_user].each{|u| u.should be_allowed_to_visit(url)}
>
> Any thoughts on that?
>
> How about:
>
> each_of(@admin, @allowed_user).should be_allowed_to_visit(url)
> none_of(@admin, @allowed_user).should be_allowed_to_visit(url)
>
> This gets the cleanliness without adding to Object.
>
> WDYT?
>
> David
>
> Rodrigo.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
