Skip to content

HTTPS clone URL

Subversion checkout URL

You can clone with HTTPS or Subversion.

Download ZIP
Browse files

README and LICENSE updates

  • Loading branch information...
commit 36b3cfc15797d1e4d010d6316f7df6fd3df03f0c 1 parent 19f0aa8
@glv authored
Showing with 17 additions and 16 deletions.
  1. +1 −1  LICENSE
  2. +16 −15 README.md
View
2  LICENSE
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-Copyright (c) 2009 Glenn Vanderburg
+Copyright (c) 2009, 2010 Glenn Vanderburg
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining
a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the
View
31 README.md
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
# rspec-unit
-Test::Unit compatibility for rspec.
+Test::Unit compatibility for Rspec.
Just add this to your code:
@@ -32,36 +32,37 @@ You can also attach metadata to the entire class with the
# ...
end
-Each instance of `Rspec::Unit::TestCase` is equivalent to a
-rspec `describe` block, so it can also include `it` blocks,
+Each instance of `Rspec::Unit::TestCase` is equivalent to an
+Rspec `describe` block, so it can also include `it` blocks,
`before` and `after` blocks, and nested `describe` blocks. Test
methods and `it` blocks can contain either assertions or `should`
expressions. `test` blocks (as found in Rails 2.x) also work.
-Additionally, assertions can be used inside ordinary rspec
+Additionally, assertions can be used inside ordinary Rspec
examples.
## Rationale
+I originally wrote test/unit compatibility for Micronaut, a lightweight
+Rspec clone by Chad Humphries. Micronaut has been rolled into Rspec as
+the core of Rspec 2, and I was able to move the test/unit compatibility
+over with minimal changes.
+
The point of this gem is not that I think test/unit is a better way
-to write tests than the RSpec style. I admit that I'm a TDD oldtimer
-who sees RSpec as mostly a cosmetic (rather than fundamental) change,
+to write tests than the Rspec style. I admit that I'm a TDD oldtimer
+who sees Rspec as mostly a cosmetic (rather than fundamental) change,
but that doesn't mean it's not an important change. My curmudgeonly
nature has its limits, and I do find specs a big improvement.
So why rspec-unit? Three reasons:
-1. I wanted to show off the generality of Rspec's architecture.
- On the surface, Rspec might not seem all that compelling
- (since it's basically an RSpec work-alike). But it's really a
- fantastic tool; it's just that the
- [innovation is all under the hood][uth], in a way that makes it
- easy to change the surface aspects. I hope rspec-unit can
+1. I wanted to show off the generality of Micronaut's (and now Rspec's)
+ architecture. I hope rspec-unit can
serve as an example for anyone who wants to experiment with new
ways of expressing tests and specs on top of Rspec.
2. Many projects with existing test/unit test suites might want to
- benefit from Rspec's [metadata goodness][metadata], or begin
- a gradual, piecemeal change to an RSpec style. That's pretty
+ benefit from the [metadata goodness][metadata] in Rspec 2, or begin
+ a gradual, piecemeal change to an Rspec style. That's pretty
easy to do with rspec-unit.
3. Even when writing specs and examples, I frequently encounter
cases where an assertion is more expressive than a `should`
@@ -79,4 +80,4 @@ test/unit.
### Copyright
-Copyright (c) 2009 Glenn Vanderburg. See LICENSE for details.
+Copyright (c) 2009, 2010 Glenn Vanderburg. See LICENSE for details.
Please sign in to comment.
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.