Skip to content

DRY analyzer specs #46

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 18, 2015
Merged

DRY analyzer specs #46

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 18, 2015

Conversation

wfleming
Copy link
Contributor

These pieces were repeated pretty much verbatim between the different
analyzer specs. That seems especially silly since this is, after all, an
engine for pointing out code duplication.

👀 @codeclimate/review

@brynary
Copy link
Member

brynary commented Nov 18, 2015

This looks good, but did we consider moving these to use the new codeclimate test harness?

@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@
module AnalyzerSpec
def self.included(base)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Would this be better added via RSpec.configure? Maybe on a in_tmpdir: true tag or something?

@wfleming
Copy link
Contributor Author

@brynary That's a good idea, but not something I want to do just now: these specs test some other things like readup contents that I don't believe the test harness handles? It would be good to use the test harness & break the other things into different specs, but it's a bigger refactor than I want to get into right now.

@pbrisbin
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

These pieces were repeated pretty much verbatim between the different
analyzer specs. That seems especially silly since this is, after all, an
engine for pointing out code duplication.
wfleming added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 18, 2015
@wfleming wfleming merged commit 469bb78 into master Nov 18, 2015
@wfleming wfleming deleted the will/dry-tests branch November 18, 2015 20:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants