Live data from Hacker News

Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec

github.com

41–42 of 42 posts

Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec

#41
post #8

While this is obviously a joke, I can see it having a limited amount of practical value. Imagine, for example, being tasked with updating a poorly-maintained legacy code base with a large number of indeterminately failing specs containing order dependencies. You could `RSpec::Maybe` everything until you're sure you have the order dependencies resolved, then convert to regular `RSpec::Expectation`s.

That's the usecase of `pending`

[deleted]

Re: Spec-me-maybe: Introduces the “maybe” syntax to RSpec

#42
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does. Especially considering the fact that RSpec itself was created as a joke solution to the "I wish my tests were more human readable" meme several years ago. Hopefully that sheds some light on why some of us might be hyper-sensitive about it.

That's not quite true. I created RSpec (in early 2005) to draw people's attention away from the word "test" because it was a huge hangup while I was teaching TDD. I kept hearing "You can't test something that doesn't exist, therefore your entire idea is bunk." I wanted to introduce TDD to people without ever using the word "test", and then switch them to using xUnit instead. Not a joke, but I guess you could reasonab…

Thanks Steven.
Post reply on HN