Received: by 10.52.38.198 with SMTP id i6mr30022864vdk.2.1322051604332;
        Wed, 23 Nov 2011 04:33:24 -0800 (PST)
X-BeenThere: rspec@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.220.184.71 with SMTP id cj7ls13775938vcb.1.canary; Wed, 23 Nov
 2011 04:33:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.88.164 with SMTP id bh4mr29948932vdb.8.1322051604144;
        Wed, 23 Nov 2011 04:33:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.52.88.164 with SMTP id bh4mr29948930vdb.8.1322051604137;
        Wed, 23 Nov 2011 04:33:24 -0800 (PST)
Return-Path: <rspec-users-boun...@rubyforge.org>
Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org. [205.234.109.19])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id en7si8155257vdb.1.2011.11.23.04.33.24;
        Wed, 23 Nov 2011 04:33:24 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of rspec-users-boun...@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=205.234.109.19;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of rspec-users-boun...@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=rspec-users-boun...@rubyforge.org
Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [127.0.0.1])
	by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4A361678369;
	Wed, 23 Nov 2011 07:33:21 -0500 (EST)
X-Original-To: rspec-us...@rubyforge.org
Delivered-To: rspec-us...@rubyforge.org
Received: from mail-ww0-f54.google.com (mail-ww0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54])
	by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37BC71678364
	for <rspec-us...@rubyforge.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 06:02:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: by wwn31 with SMTP id 31so499607wwn.23
	for <rspec-us...@rubyforge.org>; Wed, 23 Nov 2011 03:02:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.227.204.136 with SMTP id fm8mr14676662wbb.3.1322045688364;
	Wed, 23 Nov 2011 02:54:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tom-linux.box.int.llamadigital.net
	(camelid.int.llamadigital.net. [81.23.63.54])
	by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id dw6sm8030245wib.12.2011.11.23.02.54.45
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
	Wed, 23 Nov 2011 02:54:46 -0800 (PST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
From: Ash Moran <ash.mo...@patchspace.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <CAMxjd8N=SBD=xCO+Y46SOuM-oaMgCaPFW6B1W4S9kWHm8ju...@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:54:45 +0000
Message-Id: <3AE411DF-BBCC-4302-8E11-39A105E00...@patchspace.co.uk>
References: <BB8717F2-60E0-402B-9D7B-CC9751B4A...@patchspace.co.uk>
	<CAMxjd8NkjjQCriicZzqZcfZKxRfkb69fOYe_suGP1x=TXrF...@mail.gmail.com>
	<4B6478C9-D411-4B52-864F-BC4AFFAC6...@gmail.com>
	<CAMxjd8N=SBD=xCO+Y46SOuM-oaMgCaPFW6B1W4S9kWHm8ju...@mail.gmail.com>
To: rspec-users <rspec-us...@rubyforge.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Subject: Re: [rspec-users] Rails code reloading in RSpec test environment?
X-BeenThere: rspec-us...@rubyforge.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: rspec-users <rspec-us...@rubyforge.org>
List-Id: rspec-users <rspec-users.rubyforge.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://rubyforge.org/mailman/options/rspec-users>,
	<mailto:rspec-users-requ...@rubyforge.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rspec-users>
List-Post: <mailto:rspec-us...@rubyforge.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rspec-users-requ...@rubyforge.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users>,
	<mailto:rspec-users-requ...@rubyforge.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: rspec-users-boun...@rubyforge.org
Errors-To: rspec-users-boun...@rubyforge.org


On 23 Nov 2011, at 07:19, Andrew Premdas wrote:

>>> Use Ruby 1.8.7 its much faster. There is a very good screencast on
>>> Destroy All Software that might help also - the one about extracting
>>> domain objects (or something like that).
>> =

>> Anytime someone suggests using 1.8, a Chinchilla explodes. 1.9.3 has the=
 "slow require" fix - please use that if it is your concern.
> =

> Yeh I know, but have you actually tried it out and got benchmarks to
> prove that 1.9.3 is fast enough? I've been trying for the last few
> weeks to get the rails test cycle going as quickly as possible. I'd
> like to be using 1.9.x but its just been to slow.

My feeling is that using 1.8.7 over 1.9.3 to gain test speed is throwing th=
e baby out with the bathwater. Ruby 1.9 has been around a long time and has=
 useful advantages over 1.8.7. The two key points to me are:

- the slow loading time highlights a design problem, not a performance prob=
lem: it should not be necessary to load so much code to test a small part o=
f an app (we are limited as to how much we can extract from the Rails frame=
work)

- holding back to 1.8.7 will turn the minor tremors from a gradual shift to=
 1.9.3 into a tectonic quake (I'm guessing chinchillas don't like earthquak=
es)

For these reasons I'm not prepared to compromise the dev environment and re=
write our 1.9 code to work in 1.8.7, so I'll experiment later with turning =
on code reloading. If that doesn't work I'm not sure what I'll do=85

Ash

-- =

http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashmoran

_______________________________________________
rspec-users mailing list
rspec-us...@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rspec-users