features/modeling/outline_modeling.feature in cucumber_analytics-0.0.9 vs features/modeling/outline_modeling.feature in cucumber_analytics-1.0.0

- old
+ new

@@ -14,76 +14,27 @@ Background: Test file setup. Given the following feature file: """ @a_feature_level_tag - Feature: The test feature name. - Some more feature description. + Feature: @outline_tag - Scenario Outline:The scenario outline's name. - My big hunk of perfectly valid description: - | + Scenario Outline: The scenario outline's name. + Some outline description + Some more description - Scenario Outline - Examples - \"\"\" - Background - this is still one big valid description - # Basically, if it's not a step keyword or tag then I will accept - # it as description here. Cucumber might not but but that's between - # you and its lexxer/parser. ;) + Given a <setup> step + When an action step + Then a <verification> step - Given this *parameterized* step takes a table: - | <param1> | - | <param2> | - And some setup step - * some setup step -# - When a step with a *parameter* - But a big step: - #random comment - \"\"\" - some text - - #some comments - Scenario: - Scenario Outline: - Examples: - @ - Feature: - | - Given - When - Then - And - But - * - some more text - \"\"\" - Then *lots* *of* *parameters* - - Examples:text describing the significance of the examples - Anything besides the | that starts a row should be valid - description at this point in the test. YMMV - | param1 | param2 | - #A more random comment - | x | y | - @example_tag @another_one - Examples: some examples with different significance and a tag - - Words, words, words, words, - - why so many words? - # - - | param1 | param2 | - # - - # - | a | b | - + Examples: example 1 + | setup | verification | + | x | y | + Examples: example 2 + | setup | verification | + | a | b | """ And parameter delimiters of "*" and "*" When the file is read @@ -91,109 +42,18 @@ Then the test is found to have the following properties: | name | The scenario outline's name. | Scenario: The outline description is modeled. Then the test descriptive lines are as follows: - | My big hunk of perfectly valid description: | - | \| | - | Scenario Outline | - | Examples | - | """ | - | Background | - | this is still one big valid description | + | Some outline description | + | Some more description | Scenario: The outline steps are modeled. Then the test steps are as follows: - | Given this *parameterized* step takes a table: | - | \| <param1> \| | - | \| <param2> \| | - | And some setup step | - | * some setup step | - | When a step with a *parameter* | - | But a big step: | - | """ | - | 'some text' | - | '' | - | '#some comments' | - | 'Scenario:' | - | 'Scenario Outline:' | - | 'Examples:' | - | '@' | - | 'Feature:' | - | '\|' | - | 'Given' | - | 'When' | - | 'Then' | - | 'And' | - | 'But' | - | '*' | - | ' some more text' | - | """ | - | Then *lots* *of* *parameters* | - And the test steps "without" arguments are as follows: - | Given this ** step takes a table: | - | And some setup step | - | * some setup step | - | When a step with a ** | - | But a big step: | - | Then ** ** ** | - And the test steps "without" keywords are as follows: - | this *parameterized* step takes a table: | - | \| <param1> \| | - | \| <param2> \| | - | some setup step | - | some setup step | - | a step with a *parameter* | - | a big step: | - | """ | - | 'some text' | - | '' | - | '#some comments' | - | 'Scenario:' | - | 'Scenario Outline:' | - | 'Examples:' | - | '@' | - | 'Feature:' | - | '\|' | - | 'Given' | - | 'When' | - | 'Then' | - | 'And' | - | 'But' | - | '*' | - | ' some more text' | - | """ | - | *lots* *of* *parameters* | - And the test steps "without" arguments "without" keywords are as follows: - | this ** step takes a table: | - | some setup step | - | some setup step | - | a step with a ** | - | a big step: | - | ** ** ** | - And the test step "1" has the following block: - | \| <param1> \| | - | \| <param2> \| | - And the test step "5" has the following block: - | """ | - | 'some text' | - | '' | - | '#some comments' | - | 'Scenario:' | - | 'Scenario Outline:' | - | 'Examples:' | - | '@' | - | 'Feature:' | - | '\|' | - | 'Given' | - | 'When' | - | 'Then' | - | 'And' | - | 'But' | - | '*' | - | ' some more text' | - | """ | + | a <setup> step | + | an action step | + | a <verification> step | Scenario: The outline tags are modeled. Then the test is found to have the following tags: | @outline_tag | @@ -201,16 +61,17 @@ Then the test is found to have the following applied tags: | @a_feature_level_tag | Scenario: The outline example blocks are modeled. And the test example blocks are as follows: - | text describing the significance of the examples | - | some examples with different significance and a tag | + | example 1 | + | example 2 | Scenario Outline: Outline models pass all other specifications Exact specifications detailing the API for Scenario Outline models. Given that there are "<additional specifications>" detailing models When the corresponding unit tests are run Then all of those specifications are met Examples: - | additional specifications | - | outline_spec.rb | + | additional specifications | + | outline_unit_spec.rb | + | outline_integration_spec.rb |