Philosophy
rspec is a testing DSL. minitest is ruby.
-- Adam Hawkins, "Bow Before MiniTest"
在 DSL 和 Ruby 之间，我更倾向 Pure Ruby，比如 Sinatra 和 Camping 之间我更喜欢 Camping。但是，从生态系统方面，Sinatra 和 RSpec 有更多的用户和生态链。
最近看了一些 Minitest 的文章和视频，我觉得 Minitest 具有以下优点都是我喜欢的：
- Compatible with Test::Unit
- No Magic
- Tiny and Fast
- Simplicity
还有就是我的偶像 tenderlove 和 steveklabnik 都十分推崇 Minitest，Minitest 也是 Rails4 使用的测试框架。
当然，我写测试的经验不是很丰富，可能有遗漏的地方，还请指正。
以下来自Minitest Doc：
Unit tests
require "minitest/autorun"
class TestMeme < Minitest::Test
def setup
@meme = Meme.new
end
def test_that_kitty_can_eat
assert_equal "OHAI!", @meme.i_can_has_cheezburger?
end
def test_that_it_will_not_blend
refute_match /^no/, @meme.will_it_blend?
end
def test_that_will_be_skipped
skip "test this later"
end
end
Specs
require "minitest/autorun"
describe Meme do
before do
@meme = Meme.new
end
describe "when asked about cheeseburgers" do
it "must respond positively" do
@meme.i_can_has_cheezburger?.must_equal "OHAI!"
end
end
describe "when asked about blending possibilities" do
it "won't say no" do
@meme.will_it_blend?.wont_match /^no/
end
end
end
Benchmarks
http://docs.seattlerb.org/minitest/#label-Benchmarks
Mocks
class MemeAsker
def initialize(meme)
@meme = meme
end
def ask(question)
method = question.tr(" ","_") + "?"
@meme.__send__(method)
end
end
require "minitest/autorun"
describe MemeAsker do
before do
@meme = MiniTest::Mock.new
@meme_asker = MemeAsker.new @meme
end
describe "#ask" do
describe "when passed an unpunctuated question" do
it "should invoke the appropriate predicate method on the meme" do
@meme.expect :will_it_blend?, :return_value
@meme_asker.ask "will it blend"
@meme.verify
end
end
end
end
Stubs
http://docs.seattlerb.org/minitest/#label-Stubs
相关链接
- http://ruby-china.org/topics/166
- https://github.com/seattlerb/minitest
- http://blog.arvidandersson.se/2012/03/28/minimalicous-testing-in-ruby-1-9
- http://www.confreaks.com/videos/913-railsconf2012-minitest-refactoring-test-unit-and-rspec-back-to-version-0-0-1
- http://www.confreaks.com/videos/962-mwrc2012-minitest-write-awesome-tests
- http://metaskills.net/2011/03/26/using-minitest-spec-with-rails/
我选择 minitest 除了你说的一些方面还有就是一个超爽的地方，就是可以几乎无痛的从 testunit 切换到 minitest，因为他们的用法断言什么的几乎一样。
PS：tenderlove 这家伙我也喜欢。 PPS：这个不会也引起骂战吧。
反正 RSpec 能运行 Test::Unit，怎么写都没问题的么...
问：怎么写测试？
Erlang: copy expressions from REPL Python: copy whole session from REPL
minitest 的 setup 和 teardown 两个方法名总是要查一下才确定... 不像 rspec before :each, before :all, after :each, after :all 那么顺手... 而且 minitest 没有全局 setup 和 teardown
rspec 的组织方式是比较好的，def test_xxx 没有标识一个字符串意思清楚。就是顶层不能用 context 比较蛋疼... 我也是觉得 assert 比 should 好些，rspec 设置一下就可以了：
RSpec.configure do |config|
config.expect_with :stdlib
end
it "xxx" 的另一个好处是同名了也没关系 (minitest 会覆盖 -_-), def test_xxx 起个同名测试就覆盖掉了。
还有就是 minitest 的 before 会生成一个 setup 方法，要小心...
it "xxx" 的另一个好处是同名了也没关系 (minitest 会覆盖 -_-), def test_xxx 起个同名测试就覆盖掉了。
用
test "xxx" do; end
不会覆盖，再说了，干吗写一样嘛？ ：）
Minitest::Spec 用户表示还是喜欢 minitest. 哦对了，RSpec 3.0 据说要开始推 expect() 的语法（默认只启用 expect 语法，should 语法需要手动配置启用），感觉更加 verbose.
再有一个决定性的因素是速度：在我个人习惯的 TDD cycle 里，“只运行一个测试文件”是最常出现的用例。从按下编辑器快捷键到看到测试结果这个过程中，对速度影响最大的环节其实是测试框架本身的加载速度（用 $ time 看一下发现基本都是 system 时间）。这时 Minitest 大优。
##
# Provides before/after hooks for setup and teardown. These are
# meant for library writers, NOT for regular test authors. See
# #before_setup for an example.
module LifecycleHooks
##
# Runs before every test, before setup. This hook is meant for
# libraries to extend minitest. It is not meant to be used by
# test developers.
#
# As a simplistic example:
#
# module MyMinitestPlugin
# def before_setup
# super
# # ... stuff to do before setup is run
# end
#
# def after_setup
# # ... stuff to do after setup is run
# super
# end
#
# def before_teardown
# super
# # ... stuff to do before teardown is run
# end
#
# def after_teardown
# # ... stuff to do after teardown is run
# super
# end
# end
#
# class MiniTest::Test
# include MyMinitestPlugin
# end
搜了一下还真没有
nothing for before_tests though, dammit. I can't believe this still doesn't exist outside of rspec after all these years.
