resque-pool 0.3.0.beta.2 → 0.3.0

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/features/pending/pending_examples.feature

@@ -0,0 +1,229 @@
+Feature: pending examples
+
+  RSpec offers four ways to indicate that an example is disabled pending
+  some action.
+
+  Scenario: pending implementation
+    Given a file named "example_without_block_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe "an example" do
+        it "is a pending example"
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec example_without_block_spec.rb`
+    Then the exit status should be 0
+    And the output should contain "1 example, 0 failures, 1 pending"
+    And the output should contain "Not yet implemented"
+    And the output should contain "example_without_block_spec.rb:2"
+
+  Scenario: pending any arbitary reason, with no block
+    Given a file named "pending_without_block_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe "an example" do
+        it "is implemented but waiting" do
+          pending("something else getting finished")
+          this_should_not_get_executed
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec pending_without_block_spec.rb`
+    Then the exit status should be 0
+    And the output should contain "1 example, 0 failures, 1 pending"
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+      Pending:
+        an example is implemented but waiting
+          # something else getting finished
+          # ./pending_without_block_spec.rb:2
+      """
+
+  Scenario: pending any arbitary reason, with a block that fails
+    Given a file named "pending_with_failing_block_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe "an example" do
+        it "is implemented but waiting" do
+          pending("something else getting finished") do
+            raise "this is the failure"
+          end
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec pending_with_failing_block_spec.rb`
+    Then the exit status should be 0
+    And the output should contain "1 example, 0 failures, 1 pending"
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+      Pending:
+        an example is implemented but waiting
+          # something else getting finished
+          # ./pending_with_failing_block_spec.rb:2
+      """
+
+  Scenario: pending any arbitary reason, with a block that passes
+    Given a file named "pending_with_passing_block_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe "an example" do
+        it "is implemented but waiting" do
+          pending("something else getting finished") do
+            true.should be(true)
+          end
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec pending_with_passing_block_spec.rb`
+    Then the exit status should not be 0
+    And the output should contain "1 example, 1 failure"
+    And the output should contain "FIXED"
+    And the output should contain "Expected pending 'something else getting finished' to fail. No Error was raised."
+    And the output should contain "pending_with_passing_block_spec.rb:3"
+
+  Scenario: temporarily pending by prefixing `it`, `specify`, or `example` with an x
+    Given a file named "temporarily_pending_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe "an example" do
+        xit "is pending using xit" do
+        end
+
+        xspecify "is pending using xspecify" do
+        end
+
+        xexample "is pending using xexample" do
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec temporarily_pending_spec.rb`
+    Then the exit status should be 0
+    And the output should contain "3 examples, 0 failures, 3 pending"
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+      Pending:
+        an example is pending using xit
+          # Temporarily disabled with xit
+          # ./temporarily_pending_spec.rb:2
+        an example is pending using xspecify
+          # Temporarily disabled with xspecify
+          # ./temporarily_pending_spec.rb:5
+        an example is pending using xexample
+          # Temporarily disabled with xexample
+          # ./temporarily_pending_spec.rb:8
+      """
+
+  Scenario: example with no docstring and pending method using documentation formatter
+    Given a file named "pending_with_no_docstring_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe "an example" do
+        it "checks something" do
+          (3+4).should eq(7)
+        end
+        specify do
+          pending
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec pending_with_no_docstring_spec.rb --format documentation`
+    Then the exit status should be 0
+    And the output should contain "2 examples, 0 failures, 1 pending"
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+      an example
+        checks something
+         (PENDING: No reason given)
+      """
+
+  Scenario: pending with no docstring using documentation formatter
+    Given a file named "pending_with_no_docstring_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe "an example" do
+        it "checks something" do
+          (3+4).should eq(7)
+        end
+        pending do
+          "string".reverse.should eq("gnirts")
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec pending_with_no_docstring_spec.rb --format documentation`
+    Then the exit status should be 0
+    And the output should contain "2 examples, 0 failures, 1 pending"
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+      an example
+        checks something
+         (PENDING: No reason given)
+      """
+
+  Scenario: conditionally pending examples
+    Given a file named "conditionally_pending_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe "a failing spec" do
+        def run_test; raise "failure"; end
+
+        it "is pending when pending with a true :if condition" do
+          pending("true :if", :if => true) { run_test }
+        end
+
+        it "fails when pending with a false :if condition" do
+          pending("false :if", :if => false) { run_test }
+        end
+
+        it "is pending when pending with a false :unless condition" do
+          pending("false :unless", :unless => false) { run_test }
+        end
+
+        it "fails when pending with a true :unless condition" do
+          pending("true :unless", :unless => true) { run_test }
+        end
+      end
+
+      describe "a passing spec" do
+        def run_test; true.should be(true); end
+
+        it "fails when pending with a true :if condition" do
+          pending("true :if", :if => true) { run_test }
+        end
+
+        it "passes when pending with a false :if condition" do
+          pending("false :if", :if => false) { run_test }
+        end
+
+        it "fails when pending with a false :unless condition" do
+          pending("false :unless", :unless => false) { run_test }
+        end
+
+        it "passes when pending with a true :unless condition" do
+          pending("true :unless", :unless => true) { run_test }
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec ./conditionally_pending_spec.rb`
+    Then the output should contain "8 examples, 4 failures, 2 pending"
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+      Pending:
+        a failing spec is pending when pending with a true :if condition
+          # true :if
+          # ./conditionally_pending_spec.rb:4
+        a failing spec is pending when pending with a false :unless condition
+          # false :unless
+          # ./conditionally_pending_spec.rb:12
+      """
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+        1) a failing spec fails when pending with a false :if condition
+           Failure/Error: def run_test; raise "failure"; end
+      """
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+        2) a failing spec fails when pending with a true :unless condition
+           Failure/Error: def run_test; raise "failure"; end
+      """
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+        3) a passing spec fails when pending with a true :if condition FIXED
+           Expected pending 'true :if' to fail. No Error was raised.
+      """
+    And the output should contain:
+      """
+        4) a passing spec fails when pending with a false :unless condition FIXED
+           Expected pending 'false :unless' to fail. No Error was raised.
+      """

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/features/spec_files/arbitrary_file_suffix.feature

@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+Feature: arbitrary file suffix
+
+  Scenario: .spec
+    Given a file named "a.spec" with:
+      """
+      describe "something" do
+        it "does something" do
+          3.should eq(3)
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec a.spec`
+    Then the examples should all pass

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/features/step_definitions/additional_cli_steps.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
+Then /^the output should contain all of these:$/ do |table|
+  table.raw.flatten.each do |string|
+    assert_partial_output(string, all_output)
+  end
+end
+
+Then /^the output should not contain any of these:$/ do |table|
+  table.raw.flatten.each do |string|
+    all_output.should_not =~ regexp(string)
+  end
+end
+
+Then /^the example(?:s)? should(?: all)? pass$/ do
+  step %q{the output should contain "0 failures"}
+  step %q{the exit status should be 0}
+end
+
+Then /^the file "([^"]*)" should contain:$/ do |file, partial_content|
+  check_file_content(file, partial_content, true)
+end
+
+Then /^the backtrace\-normalized output should contain:$/ do |partial_output|
+  # ruby 1.9 includes additional stuff in the backtrace,
+  # so we need to normalize it to compare it with our expected output.
+  normalized_output = all_output.split("\n").map do |line|
+    line =~ /(^\s+# [^:]+:\d+)/ ? $1 : line # http://rubular.com/r/zDD7DdWyzF
+  end.join("\n")
+
+  normalized_output.should =~ regexp(partial_output)
+end

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/features/subject/attribute_of_subject.feature

@@ -0,0 +1,124 @@
+Feature: attribute of subject
+
+  WARNING: `its` will be extracted from rspec-core-3.0 into its own gem.
+
+  Use the `its` method as a short-hand to generate a nested example group with
+  a single example that specifies the expected value of an attribute of the
+  subject.  This can be used with an implicit or explicit subject.
+
+  `its` accepts a symbol or a string, and a block representing the example.
+
+      its(:size)    { should eq(1) }
+      its("length") { should eq(1) }
+
+  You can use a string with dots to specify a nested attribute (i.e. an
+  attribute of the attribute of the subject).
+
+      its("phone_numbers.size") { should eq(2) }
+
+  When the subject is a hash, you can pass in an array with a single key to
+  access the value at that key in the hash.
+
+      its([:key]) { should eq(value) }
+
+  Scenario: specify value of an attribute
+    Given a file named "example_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array do
+        context "when first created" do
+          its(:size) { should eq(0) }
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec example_spec.rb --format documentation`
+    Then the output should contain:
+      """
+      Array
+        when first created
+          size
+            should eq 0
+      """
+
+  Scenario: specify value of a nested attribute
+    Given a file named "example_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      class Person
+        attr_reader :phone_numbers
+        def initialize
+          @phone_numbers = []
+        end
+      end
+
+      describe Person do
+        context "with one phone number (555-1212)"do
+          subject do
+            person = Person.new
+            person.phone_numbers << "555-1212"
+            person
+          end
+
+          its("phone_numbers.first") { should eq("555-1212") }
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec example_spec.rb --format documentation`
+    Then the output should contain:
+      """
+      Person
+        with one phone number (555-1212)
+          phone_numbers.first
+            should eq "555-1212"
+      """
+
+  Scenario: specify value of an attribute of a hash
+    Given a file named "example_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Hash do
+        context "with two items" do
+          subject do
+            {:one => 'one', :two => 'two'}
+          end
+
+          its(:size) { should eq(2) }
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec example_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: specify value for key in a hash
+    Given a file named "example_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Hash do
+        context "with keys :one and 'two'" do
+          subject do
+            {:one => 1, "two" => 2}
+          end
+
+          its([:one]) { should eq(1) }
+          its(["two"]) { should eq(2) }
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec example_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: specify value for key in a hash-like object
+    Given a file named "example_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      require 'matrix'
+
+      describe Matrix do
+        context "with values [[1, 2], [3, 4]]" do
+          subject do
+            Matrix[[1, 2], [3, 4]]
+          end
+
+          its([0, 1]) { should eq(2) }
+          its([1, 0]) { should eq(3) }
+          its([1, 2]) { should be_nil }
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec example_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/features/subject/explicit_subject.feature

@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+Feature: explicit subject
+
+  Use `subject` in the group scope to explicitly define the value that is
+  returned by the `subject` method in the example scope.
+
+  Note that while the examples below demonstrate how `subject` can be used as a
+  user-facing concept, we recommend that you reserve it for support of custom
+  matchers and/or extension libraries that hide its use from examples.
+
+  Scenario: subject in top level group
+    Given a file named "top_level_subject_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array, "with some elements" do
+        subject { [1,2,3] }
+        it "should have the prescribed elements" do
+          subject.should == [1,2,3]
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec top_level_subject_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: subject in a nested group
+    Given a file named "nested_subject_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array do
+        subject { [1,2,3] }
+        describe "with some elements" do
+          it "should have the prescribed elements" do
+            subject.should == [1,2,3]
+          end
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec nested_subject_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: access subject from before block
+    Given a file named "top_level_subject_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array, "with some elements" do
+        subject { [] }
+        before { subject.push(1,2,3) }
+        it "should have the prescribed elements" do
+          subject.should == [1,2,3]
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec top_level_subject_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: invoke helper method from subject block
+    Given a file named "helper_subject_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array do
+        def prepared_array; [1,2,3] end
+        subject { prepared_array }
+        describe "with some elements" do
+          it "should have the prescribed elements" do
+            subject.should == [1,2,3]
+          end
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec helper_subject_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: subject block is invoked at most once per example
+    Given a file named "nil_subject_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array do
+        describe "#[]" do
+          context "with index out of bounds" do
+            before { Array.should_receive(:one_two_three).once.and_return([1,2,3]) }
+            subject { Array.one_two_three[42] }
+            it { should be_nil }
+          end
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec nil_subject_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/features/subject/implicit_receiver.feature

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+Feature: implicit receiver
+
+  When `should` is called in an example without an explicit receiver, it is
+  invoked against the subject (explicit or implicit).
+
+  Scenario: implicit subject
+    Given a file named "example_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array do
+        describe "when first created" do
+          it { should be_empty }
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec example_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: explicit subject
+    Given a file named "example_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array do
+        describe "with 3 items" do
+          subject { [1,2,3] }
+          it { should_not be_empty }
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec example_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/features/subject/implicit_subject.feature

@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
+Feature: implicitly defined subject
+
+  If the first argument to the outermost example group is a class, an instance
+  of that class is exposed to each example via the `subject` method.
+
+  While the examples below demonstrate how `subject` can be used as a
+  user-facing concept, we recommend that you reserve it for support of custom
+  matchers and/or extension libraries that hide its use from examples.
+  
+  Scenario: subject exposed in top level group
+    Given a file named "top_level_subject_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array do
+        it "should be empty when first created" do
+          subject.should be_empty
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec ./top_level_subject_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: subject in a nested group
+    Given a file named "nested_subject_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      describe Array do
+        describe "when first created" do
+          it "should be empty" do
+            subject.should be_empty
+          end
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec nested_subject_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass
+
+  Scenario: subject in a nested group with a different class (outermost wins)
+    Given a file named "nested_subject_spec.rb" with:
+      """
+      class ArrayWithOneElement < Array
+        def initialize(*)
+          super
+          unshift "first element"
+        end
+      end
+
+      describe Array do
+        describe ArrayWithOneElement do
+          context "referenced as subject" do
+            it "should be empty (because it is the Array declared at the top)" do
+              subject.should be_empty
+            end
+          end
+
+          context "created in the example" do
+            it "should not be empty" do
+              ArrayWithOneElement.new.should_not be_empty
+            end
+          end
+        end
+      end
+      """
+    When I run `rspec nested_subject_spec.rb`
+    Then the examples should all pass

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/features/support/env.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+require 'aruba/cucumber'
+
+Before do
+  if RUBY_PLATFORM =~ /java/
+    # ideas taken from: http://blog.headius.com/2010/03/jruby-startup-time-tips.html
+    set_env('JRUBY_OPTS', '-X-C') # disable JIT since these processes are so short lived
+    set_env('JAVA_OPTS', '-d32') # force jRuby to use client JVM for faster startup times
+    @aruba_timeout_seconds = 60
+  else
+    @aruba_timeout_seconds = 5
+  end
+end

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/autotest/discover.rb

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+Autotest.add_discovery { "rspec2" } if File.exist?("./.rspec")

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/autotest/rspec2.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+require 'autotest'
+require 'rspec/core/deprecation'
+
+# Derived from the `Autotest` class, extends the `autotest` command to work
+# with RSpec.
+#
+# @note this will be extracted to a separate gem when we release rspec-3.
+class Autotest::Rspec2 < Autotest
+
+  RSPEC_EXECUTABLE = File.expand_path('../../../exe/rspec', __FILE__)
+
+  def initialize
+    super()
+    clear_mappings
+    setup_rspec_project_mappings
+
+    # Example for Ruby 1.8: http://rubular.com/r/AOXNVDrZpx
+    # Example for Ruby 1.9: http://rubular.com/r/85ag5AZ2jP
+    self.failed_results_re = /^\s*\d+\).*\n\s+(?:\e\[\d*m)?Failure.*(\n(?:\e\[\d*m)?\s+#\s(.*)?:\d+(?::.*)?(?:\e\[\d*m)?)+$/m
+    self.completed_re = /\n(?:\e\[\d*m)?\d* examples?/m
+  end
+
+  # Adds conventional spec-to-file mappings to Autotest configuation.
+  def setup_rspec_project_mappings
+    add_mapping(%r%^spec/.*_spec\.rb$%) { |filename, _|
+      filename
+    }
+    add_mapping(%r%^lib/(.*)\.rb$%) { |_, m|
+      ["spec/#{m[1]}_spec.rb"]
+    }
+    add_mapping(%r%^spec/(spec_helper|shared/.*)\.rb$%) {
+      files_matching %r%^spec/.*_spec\.rb$%
+    }
+  end
+
+  # Overrides Autotest's implementation to read rspec output
+  def consolidate_failures(failed)
+    filters = new_hash_of_arrays
+    failed.each do |spec, trace|
+      if trace =~ /(.*spec\.rb)/
+        filters[$1] << spec
+      end
+    end
+    return filters
+  end
+
+  # Overrides Autotest's implementation to generate the rspec command to run
+  def make_test_cmd(files_to_test)
+    files_to_test.empty? ? '' :
+      "#{prefix}#{ruby}#{suffix} -S '#{RSPEC_EXECUTABLE}' --tty #{normalize(files_to_test).keys.flatten.map { |f| "'#{f}'"}.join(' ')}"
+  end
+
+  # Generates a map of filenames to Arrays for Autotest
+  def normalize(files_to_test)
+    files_to_test.keys.inject({}) do |result, filename|
+      result.merge!(File.expand_path(filename) => [])
+    end
+  end
+
+  private
+
+  def suffix
+    using_bundler? ? "" : defined?(:Gem) ? " -rrubygems" : ""
+  end
+
+  def using_bundler?
+    prefix =~ /bundle exec/
+  end
+
+  def gemfile?
+    File.exist?('./Gemfile')
+  end
+end

data/vendor/bundle/ruby/1.8/gems/rspec-core-2.9.0/lib/rspec/autorun.rb

@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+require 'rspec/core'
+RSpec::Core::Runner.autorun