Ensure spec names are correct

[blowmage]

Without this change I'm seeing spec names as "#Class:0x007ff82406a170", which blocks minitest-rails from being able to resolve the model/controller/mailer/etc from the spec name.

[zenspider]

I'm having to do (super rescue "dunno") on 1.8 because it freaks out that there is no to_s to super to. I don't get it.

[blowmage]

Ugh, I stopped running minitest-rails tests against 1.8 and so I didn't catch that.

Yeah... I can't think of a better way to do that than that.

def to_s # :nodoc:
  defined?(@name) ? @name : (super rescue "")
  # defined?(@name) ? @name : (super rescue "[Spec name missing]")
  # defined?(@name) ? @name : (super rescue "[unknown name]")
end

[zenspider]

Worse yet, I think it is an oddity in 1.8 at parse time only... I don't think it is even possible to hit the rescue (in this case) because everything all the way up has a to_s.

[metaskills]

This illustrates the issue.

module DSL
  def to_s
    super
  end
  alias :name :to_s
end

class Bar
  extend DSL
end

puts Bar.to_s
puts Bar.name # dsl_fail.rb:3:in `name': super: no superclass method `to_s' for Bar:Class (NoMethodError)
              # from dsl_fail.rb:13

This fixed the problem with a test. I can do a pull request?

https://gist.github.com/metaskills/5125357

[blowmage]

@metaskills Is the change in 5577af8 sufficient? If so, I think this pull request could be closed.

[metaskills]

No it is not, that was the point of the whole conversation I had here

06b9ce3#commitcomment-2772287

I.8 is failing because class names come back as "dunno"

[metaskills]

Did you see the tests I added in the gist? Should I just open up a new pull request/issue?

[blowmage]

Oh, because name has no super... I gotcha. I'll work up a failing test for that and update this pull request with a fix.

[metaskills]

But I have a failing test!!!

https://gist.github.com/metaskills/5125357

[metaskills]

And a fix :) am I taking crazy pills?

[metaskills]

OK, I just created pull request #251 just getting flustered as I said I had this fixed and was trying to communicate with y'all before doing a pull request because Ryan asked first for a "repro" in the discussion here. So rather than going on a 3rd time how I have a working patch, let the PR in #251 speak for itself.

[zenspider]

Unbunch the panties. I've been nose down working on my talk for MWRC and haven't come up for air until now.

I went with something in-between both your patches. Kept the code up in the module so anyone benefits but went with blowmage's implementation to avoid needless duplication. I also liked his tests more as they were slightly more complex (3 layers deep).

I'll get this out shortly.

[metaskills]

Unbunch the panties.

Thanks, I need that sometimes :) cheers and brews to you both 🍻