From: Brian Candler <b.candler@...>
Date: 2009-03-30T17:27:28+09:00
Subject: Re: testy.rb - ruby testing that's mad at the world

Ara Howard wrote:
> i always end up writing both samples and tests

Just a thought: I've found myself doing that too, but in particular I've 
ran an example externally to be sure it works, then ended up pasting it 
into the rdoc. So it would be really cool if rdoc could integrate the 
examples directly in the appropriate place(s). I want to be sure that my 
examples actually run as advertised, and at the moment I risk them 
becoming out of date, so I'm definitely with you on that point.

However, one problem with having runnable examples/specs is that you 
often have a lot of setup (and/or mock) code to make something run. This 
risks adding too much noise to the examples, so structuring the code so 
as to be able to filter that out would be a bonus - i.e. show me just 
the example, not the setup or post-conditions. Not easy to do without 
ripping the Ruby though.

I find the other kill-yourself part of testing is behavioural testing 
with mock objects, but that's out of scope here I think :-)

Regards,

Brian.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.