Somewhat confused by the help instructions

As a note of feedback, when I do a spec --help, I saw this line…

-e, --example [NAME|FILE_NAME]   Execute example(s) with matching

name(s). If the argument is
the path to an existing file
(typically generated by a previous
run using --format
failing_examples:file.txt), then the examples
on each line of that file will be
executed. If the file is empty,
all examples will be run (as if –
example was not specified).

so I, trying to be clever, passed it something to match:

E:\dev\ruby\spork>spec spec/spork/run_strategy/single* -e"the result"

Finished in 0.125 seconds

0 examples, 0 failures

Passing it the full test name seems to work, however:

E:\dev\ruby\spork>spec spec/spork/run_strategy/single* -e"returns the
result of the run_tests method from the forked child"

Finished in 0.34375 seconds

3 examples, 0 failures

Suggestion:

rephrase the help as “runs the test whose name equals the one
specified” (instead of using the word “matches” which to me somehow
meant “regex”), or

change the matching to be regex matching (this one is what I would
personally prefer–then you don’t have to put full test names on the
command line).

Thoughts?
-r

On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:54 PM, rogerdpack [email protected]
wrote:

                                all examples will be run (as if --

Thoughts?

Actually, I’m thinking of not supporting this in rspec-2. I personally
find the line number much more useful, since you can just copy it
directly from the failure messages to re-run something:

spec path/to/spec.rb:37

WDYT?

On 30 Jan 2010, at 06:45, David C. wrote:

                                on each line of that file will be

Finished in 0.125 seconds
Finished in 0.34375 seconds
change the matching to be regex matching (this one is what I would
personally prefer–then you don’t have to put full test names on the
command line).

Thoughts?

Actually, I’m thinking of not supporting this in rspec-2. I personally
find the line number much more useful, since you can just copy it
directly from the failure messages to re-run something:

spec path/to/spec.rb:37

This is great except when you use macros or other tricks to generate
examples - then there isn’t a 1:1: mapping from line number to
example. I often find it quite annoying to have to quote the whole
example description, so I actually quite like Roger’s idea about using
regexp matching.

rspec-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

cheers,
Matt

http://mattwynne.net
+447974 430184

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 8:38 AM, David C. [email protected]
wrote:

name(s). If the argument is

E:\dev\ruby\spork>spec spec/spork/run_strategy/single* -e"returns the
rephrase the help as "runs the test whose name equals the one
find the line number much more useful, since you can just copy it
machinery is already in place for this in rspec2’s new runner. Just
need to hook it to the command line. But right now, in
rspec-core-2.0.0.a2, you can say this in any Ruby that gets loaded
(like spec_helper.rb):

Rspec::Core.configure do |c|
c.filter_run :description => /should match this string/
end

Hooking that from the CLI will be pretty simple, so coming soon.

Done:

http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/master/features/command_line/example_name_option.feature

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 7:31 AM, Matt W. [email protected] wrote:

                               the path to an existing file

E:\dev\ruby\spork>spec spec/spork/run_strategy/single* -e"the result"
result of the run_tests method from the forked child"
specified" (instead of using the word “matches” which to me somehow
directly from the failure messages to re-run something:

spec path/to/spec.rb:37

This is great except when you use macros or other tricks to generate
examples - then there isn’t a 1:1: mapping from line number to example. I
often find it quite annoying to have to quote the whole example description,
so I actually quite like Roger’s idea about using regexp matching.

Excellent news for you both. It turns out that the underlying
machinery is already in place for this in rspec2’s new runner. Just
need to hook it to the command line. But right now, in
rspec-core-2.0.0.a2, you can say this in any Ruby that gets loaded
(like spec_helper.rb):

Rspec::Core.configure do |c|
c.filter_run :description => /should match this string/
end

Hooking that from the CLI will be pretty simple, so coming soon.

Cheers,
David

David C. wrote:

Done:
http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/master/features/command_line/example_name_option.feature

Cool stuff!

Does that match the describe groups as well? I would like to be able to
run all of the examples in either “first group” or “second group”. Will
it match?

Phillip

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Phillip K.
[email protected] wrote:

match?
Yes. I added some narrative text to explain:
http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/master/features/command_line/example_name_option.feature

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Phillip K.
[email protected] wrote:

Cool stuff!

Does that match the describe groups as well? I would like to be able to run
all of the examples in either “first group” or “second group”. Will it
match?

Also, does anyone but me find the expectation in the case where
there’s no match surprising?


Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

Rick DeNatale wrote:

Cool stuff!

Does that match the describe groups as well? I would like to be able to run
all of the examples in either “first group” or “second group”. Will it
match?

Also, does anyone but me find the expectation in the case where
there’s no match surprising?

I thought about that, as well. I would expect nothing to be done if no
match was found. Consider the case of misspelling the example or group
and having the whole shebang run instead of nothing.

Peace,
Phillip

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Phillip K.
[email protected] wrote:

Done:
run
was found. Consider the case of misspelling the example or group and having
the whole shebang run instead of nothing.

Agreed:

http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/master/features/command_line/example_name_option.feature

On 1 Feb 2010, at 14:53, Phillip K. wrote:

one of the most helpful, courteous, knowledgable people I have
encountered in all my days on the internet.

+1

Thanks for all that you do for all the communities you participate in.

Peace,
Phillip


rspec-users mailing list
removed_email_a[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users

cheers,
Matt

http://mattwynne.net
+447974 430184

David C. wrote:

Agreed:

http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/master/features/command_line/example_name_option.feature

Thanks, David.

I don’t want to sound all gushy or anything, but you have got to be one
of the most helpful, courteous, knowledgable people I have encountered
in all my days on the internet.

Thanks for all that you do for all the communities you participate in.

Peace,
Phillip

On 01/02/2010 16:20, Matt W. wrote:

Thanks, David.

I don’t want to sound all gushy or anything, but you have got to be
one of the most helpful, courteous, knowledgable people I have
encountered in all my days on the internet.

+1

1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000^100000000000000000000000

Done:

http://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/master/features/command_line/

Thanks for doing that.
-r

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Phillip K. [email protected]
wrote:

I don’t want to sound all gushy or anything, but you have got to be one of
the most helpful, courteous, knowledgable people I have encountered in all
my days on the internet.

Not to mention that he plays a mean guitar!


Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

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