Add 'thrice' expectation.

[fimmtiu]

Added a thrice expectation to complement once and twice. It's a perfectly good English word -- one of my favourites, in fact -- and I was mildly surprised when it didn't work.

Note that I didn't change the output for error messages ("expected foo at least 3 times", etc.), in case anyone's behaviour depends on that.

[yegct]

"Thrice" appears in the famous poem, Kubla Khan, by Samuel Taylor Coleridge. This alone should justify inclusion. More generally, 'thrice' is an excellent word.

[myronmarston]

if we're going to add this we should have parity with rspec-mocks:

https://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/blob/654b34a36ceefa3b12de967a2c9416ff25a8d1fd/lib/rspec/mocks/message_expectation.rb#L411-L431

[fimmtiu]

Note that the Travis failure appears to be unrelated to this change; it's an error that only occurred in the Ruby 2.1.1 build and which I cannot duplicate, even with the same seed.

[cupakromer]

I'm not a big fan of this. That said, I can live with it. I've just never been much of a fan of the whole add numeric method names idea, unless it really made a lot of sense. I've seen / used once often enough to see it's merit. twice only rarely, and I can say I've never needed a thrice.

[myronmarston]

Maybe we should also add forty_thrice and call it "the reddit" :).

[JonRowe]

Like @cupakromer I'm slightly 👎 on this, I don't like wordy additions like this either as it inevitably leads to bloat, there's always just one more, where do you draw the line?

[myronmarston]

I'm 👍 on this. Given that we have twice, it's reasonable for users to expect thrice.

there's always just one more, where do you draw the line?

I think there's a natural line after thrice because there isn't a word (or at least I don't know it) for "four times" or "five times", etc. Given that thrice is the last commonly known/used word for "x times", I think it makes sense to include it. But as I said, I'd want it to be added to rspec-mocks as well for consistency.

[xaviershay]

If we're going to include twice we should include thrice. (I don't think we should include either, but w/e.)

[xaviershay]

If we're going to be consistent, also need yield_thrice_with...

Should add beside twice in built_in_matchers/yield.feature - that's a weird spot for it, but twice isn't docced in features elsewhere.

Needs changelog entry.

[myronmarston]

If we're going to be consistent, also need yield_thrice_with...

We don't have a yield_once_with or yield_twice_with, so why do we need yield_thrice_with?

[xaviershay]

I'm sorry, I misread my grep, didn't see it was defined in the feature itself. Move along, nothing to see here...

> ag twice features
features/built_in_matchers/yield.feature
28:        def self.yield_twice_with(*args)
49:        specify { expect { |b| MyClass.yield_twice_with(1, &b) }.to yield_control.twice }
50:        specify { expect { |b| MyClass.yield_twice_with(1, &b) }.to yield_control.exactly(2).times }
51:        specify { expect { |b| MyClass.yield_twice_with(1, &b) }.to yield_control.at_least(1) }
52:        specify { expect { |b| MyClass.yield_twice_with(1, &b) }.to yield_control.at_most(3).times }
58:        specify { expect { |b| MyClass.yield_twice_with(1, &b) }.not_to yield_control.twice }
59:        specify { expect { |b| MyClass.yield_twice_with(1, &b) }.not_to yield_control.at_least(2).times }
60:        specify { expect { |b| MyClass.yield_twice_with(1, &b) }.not_to yield_control.at_least(1) }
61:        specify { expect { |b| MyClass.yield_twice_with(1, &b) }.not_to yield_control.at_most(3).times }
69:      | expected given block not to yield control at least twice  |

[JonRowe]

Can you add back an exactly(4).times so this spec covers the same as before?

[JonRowe]

Ok well, just a minor tweak to the specs and I think this is good to go

[myronmarston]

@fimmtiu are you planning to add thrice to rspec-mocks as well?

[fimmtiu]

@myronmarston I think I've made all the requested changes now.

[myronmarston]

Thanks, merged.