Thank you so much Justin. Crystal clear now.
Regards,
Gustavo Delfino
On May 26, 2011, at 12:05 AM, Justin Ko wrote:
> Actually, the lambda approach won't work, because you're carrying state
> (@index & @width) that is outside of scope in the matcher. This is what it
> would look like though:
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Gustavo Delfino wrote:
> Thank you Justin & David.
>
> I was able to to use Justin solution. I also tried hard to understand and
> use David's solution but I could not.
>
> Now I am just curious. What is &HaveXXXHelpers.on_column? A reference to a
> class method?
Thank you Justin & David.
I was able to to use Justin solution. I also tried hard to understand and use
David's solution but I could not.
Now I am just curious. What is &HaveXXXHelpers.on_column? A reference to a
class method?
Regards,
Gustavo Delfino
On May 25, 2011, at 2:04 PM, Justin Ko
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 11:20 AM, David Chelimsky wrote:
> On May 25, 2011, at 10:07 AM, Gustavo Delfino wrote:
>
> > Hello all. Thanks to subjects, custom matchers and fluent chaining I was
> able to greatly simplify my spec. But now I want to DRY my custom matchers.
> >
> > I have two custom mat
On May 25, 2011, at 10:07 AM, Gustavo Delfino wrote:
> Hello all. Thanks to subjects, custom matchers and fluent chaining I was able
> to greatly simplify my spec. But now I want to DRY my custom matchers.
>
> I have two custom matchers: 'have_text' and 'have_number' and both contain
> exactly
