Good Reasons to Use RSpec

It's been recently suggested that RSpec owes its popularity to fashion, and that people don't understand the alternatives. My experience is different.

I've been using RSpec to test Ruby code for about five years. Before RSpec, I used Ruby's Test::Unit, as well as a number of other xUnit-style frameworks for Perl and Java. I was never happy with the earlier frameworks, but I was convinced that unit testing was worthwhile so I made do with what was available.

I switched to RSpec because in very little time I found it more helpful than other frameworks I had used. The reason is this: RSpec helps me to alternate between writing code and writing tests without having to switch contexts.

By using the description of behavior as the model of testing, RSpec answers the question of what to test before you have to ask. It's more than syntactic sugar. It's conceptual sugar. I find that not having to think so much about the testing framework, I'm freed up to think about the tests themselves, so I write better tests and more of them.

RSpec has "no discernible benefit" over other frameworks? It depends on who is doing the discerning. I find plenty of good reasons to use RSpec, and I have a lot of company.