Rspec or test/spec?

Hi all,

I am confused with Rspec and test/spec. I want to know that which is
better
and which will help me in the long run.
I am currently using test/spec for my project. But with the release of
Rspec
1.0.4, I am hoping now it must have become more stable that ever.
Also I think, I can’t fully shift to the rspec, I want to use the
features
of Test::Unit. Am I going to lost those with the use of Rspec?

Regards,
Anil W.

Don’t live to geek; geek to live.
http://anildigital.blogspot.com

On 5/30/07, Anil W. [email protected] wrote:

Hi all,

I am confused with Rspec and test/spec. I want to know that which is better
and which will help me in the long run.
I am currently using test/spec for my project. But with the release of Rspec
1.0.4, I am hoping now it must have become more stable that ever.
Also I think, I can’t fully shift to the rspec, I want to use the features
of Test::Unit. Am I going to lost those with the use of Rspec?

Rspec doesn’t use Test::Unit at all, though there’s probably no reason
you can’t mix and match test/spec specs with rspec specs. I use this
plugin with test/spec that adds some rails-specific stuff:

http://svn.techno-weenie.net/projects/plugins/test_spec_on_rails/

Rspec has a lot of eyes on it though, and definitely a larger
community, so you definitely can’t go wrong with that.


Rick O.
http://lighthouseapp.com
http://weblog.techno-weenie.net
http://mephistoblog.com

Thanks Rick,

I have decided to continue with test/spec and your rails plugin for it.

Anil

On 5/30/07, Rick O. [email protected] wrote:

1.0.4, I am hoping now it must have become more stable that ever.
Rspec has a lot of eyes on it though, and definitely a larger
community, so you definitely can’t go wrong with that.


Rick O.
http://lighthouseapp.com
http://weblog.techno-weenie.net
http://mephistoblog.com


Don’t live to geek; geek to live.
http://anildigital.blogspot.com

Anil,

I’ve recently been able to move over to RSpec with some success. I’m
coming from the background that I need to get into better testing
habits and retrofit some of my older apps. I found that
rspec_scaffold helps fill in some gaps and focus my attentions on the
broad work I have ahead of me. It doesn’t replace thinking but
creates a better environment for holistic approaches to my testing.

I think my decision looks normal when you consider which technologies
I’ve gravitated towards: Haml, Sass, RSpec, Yaml, Ruby, and Rails.
All of these technologies cut to the chase and don’t ask me to do
mental acrobatics when I’m trying to get a point across. I think long-
term, moving to a more behavior-driven model of testing will reap the
greatest rewards. My tests in this context have been more explicit,
easier to write, and more encompassing. Beyond that, it’s probably
mostly a question of taste.

I can’t speak to test/spec, but you may be in a more core channel if
you stick to Test::Unit-based specs.

Good luck,

Good job Rick. Does the syntax still use the “context” and “specify”?
Readme
file using those terms. Thanks.

On 5/30/07, Bala P. [email protected] wrote:

Good job Rick. Does the syntax still use the “context” and “specify”? Readme
file using those terms. Thanks.

Yea, I guess rspec changed those with the 1.0 release? I don’t write
test/spec and I have no idea of Chris is going to change that or
anything.


Rick O.
http://lighthouseapp.com
http://weblog.techno-weenie.net
http://mephistoblog.com

On 6/26/07, David C. [email protected] wrote:

of Test::Unit. Am I going to lost those with the use of Rspec?

Rspec doesn’t use Test::Unit at all

Actually, this is not true at all. The rspec_on_rails plugin does, in
fact, wrap Test::Unit::Test case so you have access to all of the
facilities of test/unit in spec/rails.

Actually, that is not entirely true either :slight_smile:

You get all the test/unit assertions, and you get most of the fixture
support.

Cheers,
David

On 5/30/07, Rick O. [email protected] wrote:

Rspec doesn’t use Test::Unit at all

Actually, this is not true at all. The rspec_on_rails plugin does, in
fact, wrap Test::Unit::Test case so you have access to all of the
facilities of test/unit in spec/rails.

On 5/30/07, Anil W. [email protected] wrote:

Hi all,

I am confused with Rspec and test/spec. I want to know that which is better
and which will help me in the long run.
I am currently using test/spec for my project. But with the release of Rspec
1.0.4, I am hoping now it must have become more stable that ever.
Also I think, I can’t fully shift to the rspec, I want to use the features
of Test::Unit. Am I going to lost those with the use of Rspec?

Anil,

there was an excellent discussion of TDD, BDD, RSpec, ‘test/unit’ and
‘test/spec’
over on the Ruby-Talk mailing list:
http://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/94721#new

I encourage you to read it, its the most informative read on this
subject I have
seen yet (most of the contributers to RSpec, test/unit etc. were
mailing).

David C. wrote:

Actually, this is not true at all. The rspec_on_rails plugin does, in
fact, wrap Test::Unit::Test case so you have access to all of the
facilities of test/unit in spec/rails.

Actually, that is not entirely true either :slight_smile:

You get all the test/unit assertions, and you get most of the fixture
support.

You get it all with:

config.fixture_path = RAILS_ROOT + ‘/test/fixtures’

Curiously, we discovered that using “it_should_behave_like
‘MyAbstractSpec’”
conflicted with fixtures. Adding fixtures :my_records after that line,
and
another in MyAbstractSpec, produced this:

behaviour_eval.rb:137:in method_missing': undefined methodfixtures’
for
#Spec::DSL::EvalModule:0x2a9869e548 (NoMethodError)
from ./spec/models/subscription_spec.rb:5

We worked around this by simply pouring in all the fixtures:

config.global_fixtures = :party, :supplies

You also can plug in Mocha, an automated mock system, using this line in
spec/spec_helper.rb:

config.mock_with :mocha

Both Mocha and RSpec are “Domain Specific Languages” with a declarative
syntax. You declare what you need as a string of operations, and the
system
evaluates them simultaneously (not strictly procedurally, from left to
right), to generate a conclusion.

So here’s a behavior for a webservice

it “will delete the remote record” do
RIO::Rio.expects(:rio).with{ |uri| uri =~ /DELETE/ }
result = @local_record.delete_remote_record
result.should eql(true)
end

Mocha expects Rio to call its class-method rio() with an URL containing
(at
least) “DELETE” when our local record calls its delete_remote_record()
method, and that should return true.

Most items should not be mocked. Your tests and specs should be very
lean
because most of your production objects should strongly decouple. Rio is
a
special case because it calls another website, and we don’t need to hit
that
live site each time we run the tests. (We’ve had requests to stop;)


Phlip
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/9780596510657/
“Test Driven Ajax (on Rails)”
assert_xpath, assert_javascript, & assert_ajax

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