I just sent a message to the cukes list asking for advice, I hope it's a fair assessment of our situation:
http://groups.google.com/group/cukes/browse_thread/thread/81caa81ecd86d27e
I wrote a test for something I'm working on with rspec today:
Code: http://pastie.org/1052131 Output: http://pastie.org/1052132
I am not tickled with the syntax, it's a little weird, but it's not hard to work with. The code would not be super readable to a non-technical person, but the output IMO is. This gives great options to re-use code from candlepin_api and existing cukes stuff as it's all still ruby. Most importantly I find I can work with this, I can create things, call methods, put them into variables, and organize/scope it specific to an entire test instead of globally. It also does not involve regular expressions, global setup/teardown, and the text and code are in one location.
On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Bryan Kearney bkearney@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/19/2010 11:56 AM, Devan Goodwin wrote:
As before, my opinion is strongly that we are essentially re-inventing variables and namespaces because cuke has chopped out most everything we've ever known about organizing and re-using test code with classes, inheritance, fixtures, methods, and return values. I still can't
Have you or anyone else posted this to any cuke mailing list? Is this the way it is with Cuke, or how we are using it?
-- bk