On 30 Jul 2007, at 12:10, David Chelimsky wrote:
> I've definitely seen advice to start with models before, but I've not
> seen anything that says "if you're using Test::Unit, you should start
> with models". It's more a development philosophy than a tool issue.
I see this debate come round now
> I tend to work in small, complete vertical slices rather than
> completing one layer at a time. So rather than doing the whole view
> first, I'd do one small aspect of it and then push right down to the
> controller action that supports that aspect of it, then push down to
> the model, then back
On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would tend to disagree. RSpec is a Behaviour Driven Development
> > tool. The idea is that you write a small example of behaviour FIRST,
> > and use that example to drive the implementation. The reason you use
> > examples to drive impleme
> I would tend to disagree. RSpec is a Behaviour Driven Development
> tool. The idea is that you write a small example of behaviour FIRST,
> and use that example to drive the implementation. The reason you use
> examples to drive implementation comes from the idea in Test Driven
> Development that
On 7/30/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/30/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 7/30/07, Daniel N < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > On 7/30/07, Da
On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 7/30/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 7/30/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > On 7/3
On 7/30/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/30/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > I find m
On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 7/30/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > I find myself doing the same thing... the, open the model and typ
On 7/30/07, Daniel N <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I find myself doing the same thing... the, open the model and type in
> > > the it shoulds...
> > >
> > > I ws thinking along the
On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I find myself doing the same thing... the, open the model and type in
> > the it shoulds...
> >
> > I ws thinking along the same line... probably all that would be needed
> > is a ra
On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I find myself doing the same thing... the, open the model and type in
> the it shoulds...
>
> I ws thinking along the same line... probably all that would be needed
> is a rake task that hooks into the Mock class and runs all the specs
> takin
On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I find myself doing the same thing... the, open the model and type in
> the it shoulds...
I think it would need to do a bit more.
If I call mock_model( User ) and the User class doesn't exist yet that will
blow it up.
I guess at that poi
On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David, true :)
>
> I think I was more mixing up "Test::Unit" and the unit directory under
> test in terms of Rails... the unit tests are to the models... ergo...
> my definitions were mixed up :)
Makes sense.
Thanks for playing.
Cheers,
Dav
David, true :)
I think I was more mixing up "Test::Unit" and the unit directory under
test in terms of Rails... the unit tests are to the models... ergo...
my definitions were mixed up :)
Anyway... back to coding :)
Mikel
On 7/30/07, David Chelimsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/30/07, Mike
On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Nathan,
> Starting with views and working "backwards" from a Test::Unit point of
> view has definately opened up a lot of RSpec doors for me.
I've definitely seen advice to start with models before, but I've not
seen anything that says "
I find myself doing the same thing... the, open the model and type in
the it shoulds...
I ws thinking along the same line... probably all that would be needed
is a rake task that hooks into the Mock class and runs all the specs
taking not of all the stubs and mocks method calls that are made.
The
On 7/30/07, Mikel Lindsaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dear Nathan,
>
> What you are sayiing is correct, and in terms of Ruby on Rails, BDD
> _IS_ View Driven development... or at least it should be IMHO.
>
> At the end of the day, the only thing that matters in a Rails App is
> the Behaviour sh
Dear Nathan,
What you are sayiing is correct, and in terms of Ruby on Rails, BDD
_IS_ View Driven development... or at least it should be IMHO.
At the end of the day, the only thing that matters in a Rails App is
the Behaviour shown to the user, who has as their only interface, the
View.
The use
On 7/29/07, Nathan Sutton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I want to do View-Driven-Development by Behavior-Driven-Development,
> but I'm stumped really where to begin. Ideally I'd like to see a
> tutorial or something that walks though it, or browse through some
> projects using RSpec for the views,
One of the things that turned me on to BDD and RSpec was speccing
views first, that the desired end would drive the development. In
previous projects while using Test::Unit I would try to make educated
guesses as to what would be needed in the model and controllers to
derive the view witho
20 matches
Mail list logo
