This may be a joke, but there are valid scenarios for this sort of thing, which is why rspec has pending and skipped tests:
https://relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/v/3-1/docs/pending-an...
Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
11–20 of 42 posts
Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#12This has to be a joke. I'm fond of TDD just as much as the next person, but seriously, some of you RSpec fanatics have lost your minds.
Sorry, it has to be said:
After some inspection, maybe it passes for a joke.
Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#13I can see wondering if this was a joke as 'maybe' is mildly reminiscent of promise[1] and the like but if you got to .on_my_machine and still couldn't figure it out, you got some 'splainin to do. :)
[1] http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2011/09/11/asynchronous-p...
Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#14This is really funny, thanks for sharing.
Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#15Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#16The epitome of programming in Ruby.
Oh for goodness sake. It's a joke.
Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#17 it 'probably should not raise any sort of error' do
maybe { user }.will_not raise_error
end
Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh for goodness sake. It's a joke.
http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveSupport/HashWithInd...
You may want to further expand whatever point you're trying to make. That seems like a perfectly reasonable class; there are plenty of times where I'm receiving input from multiple sources, such as combining default options where keys are symbols with human input where keys are strings.
Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#19This may be a joke, but there are valid scenarios for this sort of thing, which is why rspec has pending and skipped tests: https://relishapp.com/rspec/rspec-core/v/3-1/docs/pending-an...
There are valid scenarios for having a test which is expected to fail in some settings. But of course you should always know why a test might fail and be explicit. (Which is exactly what pending and skipped tests are for.)
Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec
#20This has to be a joke. I'm fond of TDD just as much as the next person, but seriously, some of you RSpec fanatics have lost your minds.
I promise its a joke. I work with this gent and we were frustrated with some specs so he said he was going to make this. haha.