El 09/12/2009, a las 19:15, David Chelimsky escribió:
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Pat Maddox <mailingli...@patmaddox.com
> wrote:
[...@admin, @allowed_user].should all(be_allowed_to_visit(url))
[...@admin, @allowed_user].should all_be_allowed_to_visit(url)
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.
I'm puzzled as to why people are so focussed on making specs read like
plain text English when they are still developer-facing Ruby code.
Especially suprised in this case of wanting to avoid the "each +
block" enumeration idiom, which is about as "bread and butter" Ruby as
you can get, readable to anybody who's ever read the first chapter of
a Ruby book.
Cheers,
Wincent
_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-users@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users
