Apparent regression in rspec 2 on ruby 1.9: constant resolution fails in describes in nested modules

Hi,

I’ve converted a couple of my smaller libraries’ spec suites to rspec 2
with no trouble. (I’m enjoying the new version – thanks to all
involved.) I’m trying to convert one a larger suite now and I’ve run
into two problems on ruby 1.9.1 (but not 1.8.7) related to constant
resolution in describes inside of modules. One of the problems haven’t
been able to reproduce in a simple test case, but the other one I have.
Here’s the reproducible one:

---- baz_spec.rb

module Foo
module Quux
class Baz
def name
“noise”
end
end
end
end

module Foo::Quux
describe Baz do
it “has a name” do
Baz.new.name.should == ‘noise’
end
end
end

----

This spec passes on rspec 2.0.1 and 1.3.0 on Ruby 1.8.7:


$ ruby -v
ruby 1.8.7 (2010-08-16 patchlevel 302) [i686-darwin10.4.0]
$ spec 1.3.0 baz_spec.rb
.

Finished in 0.002011 seconds

1 example, 0 failures
$ rspec 2.0.1 baz_spec.rb
.

Finished in 0.00077 seconds
1 example, 0 failures

It also passes on rspec 1.3.0 on Ruby 1.9.1. On rspec 2.0.1, it fails:


$ ruby -v
ruby 1.9.1p378 (2010-01-10 revision 26273) [i386-darwin10.3.0]
$ spec 1.3.0 baz_spec.rb
.

Finished in 0.020187 seconds

1 example, 0 failures
$ rspec 2.0.1 baz_spec.rb
F

Failures:

  1. Foo::Quux::Baz has a name
    Failure/Error: Baz.new.name.should == ‘noise’
    uninitialized constant RSpec::Core::ExampleGroup::Nested_1::Baz

    ./baz_spec.rb:14:in `block (2 levels) in module:Quux

Finished in 0.00159 seconds
1 example, 1 failure

Is this a bug or expected behavior in rspec 2? I’ll file an issue if
it’s a bug – this would be against rspec-core, correct?

Thanks,
Rhett

On Nov 3, 2010, at 5:39 PM, Rhett S. wrote:

   "noise"

end
.

1 example, 0 failures
1 example, 1 failure

Is this a bug or expected behavior in rspec 2? I’ll file an issue if it’s a bug
– this would be against rspec-core, correct?

Same issue just came up on this list yesterday:
http://groups.google.com/group/rspec/browse_thread/thread/60cfab923dbf007a

Hi,

On Nov 5, 2010, at 7:13 AM, David C. wrote:

On Nov 3, 2010, at 5:39 PM, Rhett S. wrote:

Hi,

I’ve converted a couple of my smaller libraries’ spec suites to rspec 2 with no
trouble. (I’m enjoying the new version – thanks to all involved.) I’m trying to
convert one a larger suite now and I’ve run into two problems on ruby 1.9.1 (but
not 1.8.7) related to constant resolution in describes inside of modules. One of
the problems haven’t been able to reproduce in a simple test case, but the other
one I have. Here’s the reproducible one:

[details snipped]

Is this a bug or expected behavior in rspec 2? I’ll file an issue if it’s a
bug – this would be against rspec-core, correct?

Same issue just came up on this list yesterday:
http://groups.google.com/group/rspec/browse_thread/thread/60cfab923dbf007a

Yeah, those were both me – I sent the first one from the wrong address.
Sorry about the noise.

To summarize what I’ve learned for someone who comes across this later:
1.9.1 has some bugs regarding scoping. While rspec 1.3.x worked around
these bugs in some fashion, rspec 2 will not. (Since 1.9.1 is a
superseded revision of the experimental version of ruby, this seems
reasonable to me.) I filed an issue1 requesting that the non-support
of 1.9.1 be noted in the upgrade guide. Myron M. helpfully pointed
out a workaround for the minimal example I posted – my actual specs are
more complex, but I’m sure there are similar workarounds. For the
particular gem I’m working on (an internal one) dropping support for
1.9.1 in favor of 1.9.2 is a fine option, so I’m doing that instead.

Thanks for the help,
Rhett

This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.

| Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs