MiniTest & Test::Unit::TestResult in Ruby 1.9.1

ruby-talk
1

It looks like Test::Unit::TestResult [1] has disappeared in Ruby 1.9.1. Is
this correct?

In fact, it looks like requiring 'test/unit' now just gets you a thin
wrapper around MiniTest. Is this correct?

In Mocha's acceptance tests we currently use Test::Unit to run tests within
tests [2] and Test::Result gives us access to the errors and failures that
occurred within the inner test. This gives us clean looking tests like
ParameterMatcherTest [3].

···

--
James.
http://blog.floehopper.org

[1] http://is.gd/hwZb
[2] http://is.gd/hwYM
[3] http://is.gd/hx14

2

This is correct. Test::Unit has been retired.

James Edward Gray II

···

On Jan 28, 2009, at 9:17 AM, James Mead wrote:

It looks like Test::Unit::TestResult [1] has disappeared in Ruby 1.9.1. Is
this correct?

In fact, it looks like requiring 'test/unit' now just gets you a thin
wrapper around MiniTest. Is this correct?

3

Retired? I beleive it is still an active project, only it is now a
separate install.

T.

···

On Jan 28, 10:38 am, James Gray <ja...@grayproductions.net> wrote:

On Jan 28, 2009, at 9:17 AM, James Mead wrote:

> It looks like Test::Unit::TestResult [1] has disappeared in Ruby
> 1.9.1. Is
> this correct?

> In fact, it looks like requiring 'test/unit' now just gets you a thin
> wrapper around MiniTest. Is this correct?

This is correct. Test::Unit has been retired.

4

Yeah, my bad. I should have said it has been retired as a standard library.

James Edward Gray II

···

On Jan 28, 2009, at 1:54 PM, Trans wrote:

On Jan 28, 10:38 am, James Gray <ja...@grayproductions.net> wrote:

On Jan 28, 2009, at 9:17 AM, James Mead wrote:

It looks like Test::Unit::TestResult [1] has disappeared in Ruby
1.9.1. Is
this correct?

In fact, it looks like requiring 'test/unit' now just gets you a thin
wrapper around MiniTest. Is this correct?

This is correct. Test::Unit has been retired.

Retired? I beleive it is still an active project, only it is now a
separate install.