Thanks for your examples, Chris!
regards,
Levy
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 11:25 AM, Chris Flipse wrote:
> You might want to look into using a null object, and breaking that first
> spec up into several examples
> (a null object returns itself when sent a message it doesn't know how to
> handle)
>
Hello Scott,
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Scott Taylor wrote:
> http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?LawOfDemeter
>
> Specs are as much of a design tool as a testing tool, and the use of mocks
> in your specs show just how ugly the current design is.
>
> Either write a wrapper around the library which tak
Levy Carneiro Jr. wrote:
Hello!
I'm trying to spec a method, that has several chained calls.
http://gist.github.com/78562 (spec)
http://gist.github.com/78563 (model)
In the first spec, I'm trying to focus on the method calls that have
to be made, and the arguments they should receive.
Is th
You might want to look into using a null object, and breaking that first
spec up into several examples
(a null object returns itself when sent a message it doesn't know how to
handle)
http://gist.github.com/78570
I've built more than a few named_scope chains using this pattern, and it
seems to w
Hello!
I'm trying to spec a method, that has several chained calls.
http://gist.github.com/78562 (spec)
http://gist.github.com/78563 (model)
In the first spec, I'm trying to focus on the method calls that have to be
made, and the arguments they should receive.
Is there a better way to spec the
