|Mat Schaffer on 13 Sep 2007 15:46:21 -0000|
On Sep 13, 2007, at 11:09 AM, Colin A. Bartlett wrote:
It's got 'em now. Haven't tried it but Story Runner sounds cool:
I remember reading this before and thinking "That's way too many strings". I still think that, but I love where it's headed. I can't wait to see something like this that would even allow you to bind common natural language requirements to code w/o explicitly providing a block.
For example: Given "a foo named", "bob"
without a block could be programatically interpretted as Foo.create! :name => bob
Even neater would be to design some sort of set of stateful functions and method_missing that allowed you to just write:
Given a foo named bob
and get the same result via the ruby interpretter. I love it! -Mat _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit: http://lists.phillyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/talk