puyo/rspec3-is-more-verbose.md

## rspec3-is-more-verbose.md

      
    Raw
  

              rspec3-is-more-verbose.md
            
          
    RSpec 3 syntax is more verbose.
About twice as many characters to type to stub something:
obj.stub(client: client)                          # old
allow(obj).to receive(:client).and_return(client) # new
allow(obj).to receive(client: client)             # possible? still much longer
allow(obj, client: client)                        # I might wrap it in this
More characters to type for every single assertion (multiply by number of assertions desired):
obj.should == value
expect(obj).to eq value          # +4 characters

obj.should_receive(:method)
expect(obj).to receive(:method)  # +4 characters

expect(obj, eq value)            # +2 characters and doesn't read as well
# old frowned upon "its" extension, but look how few keystrokes, and how DRY
its(:body) { should include(text) }

# new (via transpec)
describe '#body' do
  subject { super().body }               # jon would disapprove of this anyway?
  it { is_expected.to include(text) }    # why is there one _ and one . (says my don't make me think brain)
end

its(:body) { is_expected.to include(text) }
I think there are more examples too.
But you know, I don't so much mind the extra typing, it's probably having to type ( that bugs me. That character is significantly harder to type than . and ==.
Was the less metaprogramming, less magical solution worth it?
I have no easy solution to this by the way. Just trying to communicate something I expressed in 140 characters better.