Channels
#spek
- s
simon.vergauwen
09/19/2016, 8:28 AMCopy codelistOf("<mailto:test@appfoundry.be|test@appfoundry.be>", "<mailto:ttest@fffff.org|ttest@fffff.org>", "<mailto:bbbb@bbbbb.com|bbbb@bbbbb.com>").forEach { email -> context("$email should show"){ it("works"){ assert(true) } } it("$email should be shown as email") { mainPresenter.processText(email) verify(mainView, times(1)).showItem(any<Item>()) } } - s
simon.vergauwen
09/19/2016, 8:29 AMNaming the forEach parameter had no effect. Thought maybe some weird conflict but that’s not the issue. - s
simon.vergauwen
09/19/2016, 8:34 AMHmm. even when I make it hardcoded it fails. - s
simon.vergauwen
09/19/2016, 8:34 AM😞 - o
orangy
09/19/2016, 8:37 AMI believe the problem is IntelliJ IDEA testing subsystem. AFAIK, it tries to parse the string to guess class/method name for navigation and such, so something that looks like dot-separated text could be skewed. With JUnit 5 it shouldn’t be the case, though. Try changing the text so it doesn’t have dot-separated string in front of it - s
simon.vergauwen
09/19/2016, 8:39 AMIt’s indeed the dot that breaks in IntelliJ. - s
simon.vergauwen
09/19/2016, 8:39 AMOkay, no biggie. I’ll just construct my description differently. - s
simon.vergauwen
09/19/2016, 8:39 AMI’m work for Android. So JUnit 5 is not an option atm 😞 - s
simon.vergauwen
09/19/2016, 8:40 AMBut thanks 4 the quick feedback! @orangy👍 1 - d
daniel.lindeman
09/23/2016, 11:22 PM@daniel.lindeman has left the channel - h
hhariri
09/25/2016, 6:01 PM<!here|@here> Quick poll regarding beforeEach: Given the following code, what behaviour would you expect (please vote on what you’d expect to happen, not what actually happens): given(“some context”) { beforeEach { doSomething() } on(“some action”) { doSomeAction() it(“should pass some test”) { someAssertion() } } } 1. beforeEach should execute for each it 2. beforeEach should execute for each on Please vote using 👍 for 1 and 👎 for 2👎 14👍 52️⃣ 3 - d
dmitriy.m
09/25/2016, 6:01 PM2. - o
orangy
09/25/2016, 6:02 PMWhy not use 1️⃣ and 2️⃣ ? 🙂 - h
hhariri
09/25/2016, 6:02 PMCause I couldn’t find the damn emoji’s 😞 - e
eddie
09/25/2016, 6:02 PM(they're under symbols) - m
malcolm.newsome
09/25/2016, 6:02 PM@malcolm.newsome pinned a message to this channel. - m
malcolm.newsome
09/25/2016, 6:03 PM@malcolm.newsome pinned a message to this channel. - h
hhariri
09/25/2016, 6:03 PM@hhariri pinned a message to this channel. - a
adambl4
09/25/2016, 6:03 PM1. that makes tests more unit and independent of an external scope - h
hhariri
09/25/2016, 6:05 PM@adambl4 how so? - e
eddie
09/25/2016, 6:15 PMI'd say #1 does the opposite - e
eddie
09/25/2016, 6:16 PMif each indentation level can be thought of as a new "scope", then any
should apply to each of its siblings non-recursivelybeforeEach👍 2 - e
eddie
09/25/2016, 6:16 PM(that's my understanding of #2 at least) - h
hhariri
09/25/2016, 6:17 PM@eddie Yes and I believe that as it is right now, it might be confusing people. - e
eddie
09/25/2016, 6:17 PMreally? 😕 - h
hhariri
09/25/2016, 6:17 PMWell, right now beforeEach, independently of where its placed will be executed for each it. - e
eddie
09/25/2016, 6:18 PMoh - e
eddie
09/25/2016, 6:18 PMyeah that would confuse me too, then - a
adambl4
09/25/2016, 6:25 PMI interpret an
block as an unit test and havingit
that executes for eacheach
bring mutabilty to test environment. In this case we can not guarantee thatgroup
is unit and its result not depends on order of execution, scope depth, etc.it - h
hhariri
09/25/2016, 6:43 PM@adambl4 do you use context?