On Jan 27, 2008 7:47 PM, Jonathan Linowes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Note, named routes cannot be accessed unless you have a response (eg after
> you've run a controller action)
> See
> http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/201-enable-named-urls-before-response
Since you bring it
Note, named routes cannot be accessed unless you have a response (eg
after you've run a controller action)
See http://rspec.lighthouseapp.com/projects/5645/tickets/201-enable-
named-urls-before-response
On Jan 27, 2008, at 8:26 PM, Matt Darby wrote:
On Jan 27, 2008, at 8:05 PM, David Chelim
On Jan 27, 2008, at 8:05 PM, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Nov 21, 2007 3:10 PM, Chris Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I can't figure out how to make the updates to allow for the
route_form
method to return a url that matches the expected.
Here is a sample
route_for(:controller => :task, :actio
On Nov 21, 2007 3:10 PM, Chris Olsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't figure out how to make the updates to allow for the route_form
> method to return a url that matches the expected.
>
> Here is a sample
> route_for(:controller => :task, :action => :new).should == "/task/new"
>
> If a task ha
On Jan 27, 2008 6:27 PM, Matt Darby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Olsen wrote:
> > I can't figure out how to make the updates to allow for the route_form
> > method to return a url that matches the expected.
>
>
> Sorry to bump such an old post, but the interweb doesn't really show
> anything
Chris Olsen wrote:
> I can't figure out how to make the updates to allow for the route_form
> method to return a url that matches the expected.
Sorry to bump such an old post, but the interweb doesn't really show
anything for routing specs when it comes to nested resources. I just
find this una
A good thing to note is that you can run many of the distributed scm tools
in a 'svn wrapper' mode to ease transition with existing repositories. That
made the switch much easier for me.
- Chad
On Jan 27, 2008 5:00 PM, Dan North <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can see this descending into a mercu
On Jan 27, 2008 2:00 PM, Dan North <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can see this descending into a mercurial vs git religious war :)
Doubtful. The enlightened among us don't have time to bother with
mouthy users of that inferior dvcs.
___
rspec-users mail
I can see this descending into a mercurial vs git religious war :)
Hi Corey. I'm using mercurial for both home and work use (supplementing some
of subversion's shortcomings, mainly around merging). I looked (briefly) at
git and - less briefly - at darcs. I settled on mercurial for purely
non-scien
On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 08:25:49AM +0100, aslak hellesoy wrote:
> On Jan 24, 2008 1:04 AM, Ben Mabey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > While the original post had DRY in the subject line I don't see this as
> > a DRY issue. I see it as a visualization and maintenance issue. If I
> > add a new role a
On Jan 27, 2008 3:33 PM, Corey Haines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> This isn't about rspec, but this list has people whose opinions I respect.
>
> So, I'm looking for a new version control system for my local development. I
> was going to install subversion, but I've heard rumors of peo
Hi, all,
This isn't about rspec, but this list has people whose opinions I respect.
So, I'm looking for a new version control system for my local development. I
was going to install subversion, but I've heard rumors of people using some
newer ones. Thoughts? I'd like to be able to run it either l
I just wanted to put one last note here (I will be blogging about this).
WOW! I absolutely love that initialization syntax. I just went through some
old specs and replaced my stubs with the initialization hash on the mock
creation. Really sweet.
-Corey
On Jan 23, 2008 10:35 AM, David Chelimsky <
Ben,
You're trying to test more than one thing in one spec. The gutter
that's steered you into here is that you're looking for side-effects
of a method you've mocked. Your spec says to make sure the template
calls "body_class" and to have the call return a string, but that's
not how the body_clas
Ah, I was unaware of this. Thanks for the pointer.
On Jan 27, 2008, at 2:42 AM, Francois Wurmus wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> one way of doing this is to leave the block out and just write:
> it "should bla bla"
>
> No 'do', no 'end'. The example will be pending this way.
>
>
> François
___
15 matches
Mail list logo
