On 2008-09-29, at 19:33, Zach Dennis wrote:
Having chained_replace_html is a hack to separate the regular
expressions based on if you used Way #1 or Way #2.
Interesting. Thanks for that explanation.
I have stopped relying on using RJS selectors to test against
generated JavaScript. I have als
On 2008-09-29, at 13:19, Steve Schafer wrote:
I think it's a parsing problem, rather than an idiom problem. I
think he
read it as if "offhand" were the object of "that is offhand," which
doesn't make much sense.
Hah, you're right, Steve =)
___
rspe
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 11:59 PM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-09-28, at 17:20, Nick Hoffman wrote:
>>
>> 431 it 'should hide the map filter errors ' do
>> 432 do_xhr @xhr_params
>> 433 response.should have_rjs
>> 434 # response.should have_
On Mon, 29 Sep 2008 11:34:34 -0500, you wrote:
>On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 2008-09-29, at 07:58, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>>
...
>>>
>>> I'm not sure why that is offhand, still waking up this fine Monday
>>> morning, but I'd recommend throwing th
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-09-29, at 07:58, David Chelimsky wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2008-09-28, at 17:20, Nick Hoffman wrote:
431 it 'should hide t
On 2008-09-29, at 07:58, David Chelimsky wrote:
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On 2008-09-28, at 17:20, Nick Hoffman wrote:
431 it 'should hide the map filter errors ' do
432 do_xhr @xhr_params
433 response.should have_rjs
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:59 PM, Nick Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2008-09-28, at 17:20, Nick Hoffman wrote:
>>
>> 431 it 'should hide the map filter errors ' do
>> 432 do_xhr @xhr_params
>> 433 response.should have_rjs
>> 434 # response.should have_
On 2008-09-28, at 17:20, Nick Hoffman wrote:
431 it 'should hide the map filter errors ' do
432 do_xhr @xhr_params
433 response.should have_rjs
434 # response.should have_rjs(:hide, 'map-filter-errors')
435 end
I just discovered that I need to pass :
I'm writing specs for an XHR, and am having troubles getting my specs
to see that a is being hidden.
=== map_filter.rjs
19 else
20 puts "map_filter.rjs> else!"
21 # Display the filter errors.
22 page['map-filter-errors'].hide
23 page['map-filter-errors'].replace_html @map_filter_err
