Overriding "should"

[Ittai Zeidman]

Hi,

I sometimes have the urge to use a different keyword than "should" in my mutable specifications.

For example when I want to document things I don't support I would love to have something like

"MyClass" doesNotSupport ... and of course have that print as "does not support" in the reports.

Is there an easy mechanism to do that?

[etorreborre]

The intended way to do that is to write whatever you want and use the `>>` operator:

class MySpec extends mutable.Specification {

  "MyClass does not support" >> {

     "this" >> { badStuff }

     "and *especially* that" >> { evenWorseStuff }

  }  

}

You could also have a look at how should is implemented and add your own implicit conversions but the purpose of `>>` is precisely to let you be free with your text and not slave to the should/in paradigm.

Eric.

[Ittai Zeidman]

Very nice, thanks!

[Ittai Zeidman]

Hi Eric,

I came back to this issue and wanted to replace "should" with "of" for a specific case.

I went to look at how it's implemented and it's a "private [specs2]" scope.

WDYT about making it public? 

Other options are to copy all that code or to move my one liner to specs2 package. WDYT?

Thanks!

[etorreborre]

I think I prefer the second option. I have tried to put private[specs2] in some parts where I thought things might not be stable in terms of API.

So you know that this part could have to be rewritten in a future upgrade.

Eric.

[Ittai Zeidman]

I ended up by putting my one liner in the specs2 package.
I think it's a reasonable mix between duplicating as little code as possible and being aware of the brittleness of the API.
Thanks!

--

Ittai Zeidman

Cell: 054-6735021

40 Hanamal street, Tel Aviv, Israel