Asp Forum - [ANN] test/spec 0.2, a BDD interface for Test::Unit

Christian Neukirchen

10/18/2006 4:27:00 PM

Hello,

today I'm releasing test/spec 0.2, a library to do BDD with Test::Unit.

(See below for changes in version 0.2.)

== What is test/spec?

test/spec layers an RSpec-inspired interface on top of Test::Unit, so
you can mix TDD and BDD (Behavior-Driven Development).

test/spec is a clean-room implementation that maps most kinds of
Test::Unit assertions to a `should'-like syntax.

Consider this Test::Unit test case:

class TestFoo < Test::Unit::TestCase
def test_should_bar
assert_equal 5, 2 + 3
end
end

In test/spec, it looks like this:

require 'test/spec'

context "Foo" do
specify "should bar" do
(2 + 3).should.equal 5
end
end

test/spec does not include a mocking/stubbing-framework; use whichever
you like to---FlexMock and Mocha have been tested.

test/spec has no dependencies outside Ruby 1.8.

== Mixing test/spec and test/unit

test/spec and Test::Unit contexts/test cases can be intermixed freely,
run in the same test and live in the same files. You can just add them
to your Rake::TestTask, too. test/spec allows you to leverage your
full existing Test::Unit infrastructure.

test/spec does not change Test::Unit with the exception of
monkey-patching Test::Unit::TestSuite to order the test cases before
running them. (This should not do any harm, but if you know a way
around it, please tell me.)

== Wrapped assertions

assert_equal: should.equal, should ==
assert_not_equal: should.not.equal, should.not ==
assert_same: should.be
assert_not_same: should.not.be
assert_nil: should.be.nil
assert_not_nil: should.not.be.nil

assert_in_delta: should.be.close
assert_match: should.match, should =~
assert_no_match: should.not.match, should.not =~

assert_instance_of: should.be.an.instance_of
assert_kind_of: should.be.a.kind_of
assert_respond_to: should.respond_to

assert_raise: should.raise
assert_nothing_raised: should.not.raise
assert_throws: should.throw
assert_nothing_thrown: should.not.throw
assert_block: should.satisfy

== Additional assertions

These assertions are not included in Test::Unit, but have been added
to test/spec for convenience:

* should.not.satisfy
* a.should.<predicate> (works like assert a.<predicate>?)
* a.should.be <operator> (where <operator> is <, <=, >, >=, or ===)
* should.output, to check what is printed

== SpecDox and RDox

test/spec adds two additional test runners to Test::Unit, based on the
console runner but with a different output format.

SpecDox, run with <tt>--runner=specdox</tt> (or <tt>-rs</tt>) looks
like RSpec's output:

spec.output
- works for print
- works for puts
- works with readline

RDox, run with <tt>--runner=rdox</tt> (or <tt>-rr</tt>) can be
included for RDoc documentation (e.g. see SPECS):

== spec.output
* works for print
* works for puts
* works with readline

SpecDox and RDox work for Test::Unit too:

$ ruby -r test/spec test/testunit/test_testresult.rb -rs

Test::Unit::TC_TestResult
- fault notification
- passed?
- result changed notification

Finished in 0.106647 seconds.

3 specifications (30 requirements), 0 failures

== specrb

Since version 0.2, test/spec features a standalone test runner called
specrb. specrb is like an extended version of testrb, Test::Unit's
test runner, but has additional options. It can be used for
plain Test::Unit suites, too.

$ specrb -a -s -n should.output

should.output
- works for print
- works for puts
- works with readline

Finished in 0.162571 seconds.

3 specifications (6 requirements), 0 failures

See specrb --help for the usage.

== Changes in version 0.2

* Better, module-based implementation
* Official support for FlexMock and Mocha
* More robust Should#output
* Should#_operator_
* Nested contexts
* Standalone test/spec runner, specrb
* -w warning free

== Roadmap

Version 0.3 (November 2006):: deprecate underscore forms.

Version 1.0 (Late November 2006):: first stable release.

== Contact

Please mail bugs, suggestions and patches to
<mailto:chneukirchen@gmail.com>.

Darcs repository ("darcs send" is welcome for patches):
http://chneuk.../repo...

== Thanks to

* Eero Saynatkari for writing should.output.
* Thomas Fuchs for script.aculo.us BDD testing which convinced me.
* Dave Astels for BDD.
* The RSpec team for API inspiration.
* Nathaniel Talbott for Test::Unit.

== Copying

Copyright (C) 2006 Christian Neukirchen <http://purl.org/net/chneuk...
test/spec is licensed under the same terms as Ruby itself.

== Where can I get it?

You can download test/spec 0.2 at

http://chneuk.../releases/testspec-0....

Alternatively, you can checkout from the development repository with:

darcs get http://chneuk.../repo...

(Patches using "darcs send" are most welcome.)

== Links

Behavior-Driven Development:: <http://behaviour-drive...
RSpec:: <http://rspec.rubyforg...
script.aculo.us testing:: <http://mir.aculo.us/articles/2006/08/29/bdd-style-javascript-t...
FlexMock:: <http://onestepback.org/software/fle...
Mocha:: <http://mocha.rubyforg...

Happy hacking and have a nice day,
Christian Neukirchen

d59a0412f8930bf8354d1fe2e089a49d testspec-0.2.0.tar.gz
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> http://chneuk...

2 Answers

Rob Sanheim

10/19/2006 6:08:00 AM

On 10/18/06, Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> wrote:
> == Roadmap
>
> Version 0.3 (November 2006):: deprecate underscore forms.
>

Hi Christian

This all looks very neat, I'd like to give it a try. Two quick questions:

* have you heard any feedback on how well it works w/i rails,
especially the multiple aliases of setup/teardown and similiar hackery
that goes on?

* why are.method.calls done with periods instead_of nice underscores?

- Rob

--
http://www.robs...
http://www.seekin...
http://www.a...

Christian Neukirchen

10/19/2006 5:09:00 PM

"Rob Sanheim" <rsanheim@gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Christian
>
> This all looks very neat, I'd like to give it a try. Two quick questions:
>
> * have you heard any feedback on how well it works w/i rails,
> especially the multiple aliases of setup/teardown and similiar hackery
> that goes on?

I didn't try it with rails yet, but it uses the same mechanisms as the
mocking libraries, so it should work. Feedback is welcome.

> * why are.method.calls done with periods instead_of nice underscores?

Because that's far easier to implement and extend (and I actually
think it looks better).

> - Rob
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> http://chneuk...

comp.lang.ruby

[ANN] test/spec 0.2, a BDD interface for Test::Unit

Christian Neukirchen

Rob Sanheim

Christian Neukirchen

x Login to ForumsZone