Convert regex samples to better more up to date ones.

[luke-hill]

Summary

As written above, use better regex statements in sample features

Motivation and Context

More tidying up of the test suite

How Has This Been Tested?

bundle exec cucumber

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected).

Checklist:

• I've added tests for my code.
• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.

This will slightly conflict with the other PR I made, but I'll rebase whichever one is approved last and then merge the 2nd one in.

[luke-hill]

@olleolleolle / @xtrasimplicity Happy for me to merge this, nothing special in here.

[xtrasimplicity]

Sorry, @luke-hill, I've been ultra busy with work recently so haven't really had a chance to review anything you've requested.

I don't have time to properly review this just yet, but after a quick glance, the only thing I wonder is whether there's a reason why you've added brackets around the step definitions? Stylistically, omitting brackets when there's only a handful of args is pretty common in Ruby - do we have a new style guide/are we planning to standardise the syntax so that the different languages are more similar, stylistically?

[luke-hill]

I think I just tried to have everything looking the same. Judging from the commit SHA's everything that has been added to rails has come from at least 3-5 years. These last few areas were the only ones that weren't wrapped.

Most areas I find cucumber use brackets, and some of the inbuilt step definition code uses brackets, so I just figured get it all looking the same.

Also, rubocop will complain (Not sure here because of ruby / rubocop version), when you write a non-bracketed slash-delimited regex, as it can be slightly ambiguous. In hindsight I "probably" should have mentioned this.

[xtrasimplicity]

Thanks, @luke-hill. That seems reasonable to me.

I'll review this further when I get a chance. :)

[luke-hill]

Is this GTM?

[luke-hill]

Re-ping @olleolleolle @xtrasimplicity

[xtrasimplicity]

This is looking good. Happy to merge as-is if @olleolleolle is comfortable with the use of when in scenario backgrounds without given. :)

[xtrasimplicity]

I think Given works better here, to be honest, as when usually denotes an action that you do given a state rather than set the state itself.

[luke-hill]

if you look at what is happening, a create action is being invoked, which suggests it is an action. That was my 2 cents.

[xtrasimplicity]

Yep, I understand that. Just not sure about the lack of Given. I've always understood that given sets the initial state and when manipulates the state in a way that is verified by subsequent thensteps.

I may have interpreted wrongly, though. :)

[xtrasimplicity]

This is good. I like the use of pronouns in steps - makes it more obvious that cucumber is about improving collaboration and makes it easier to adhere to business rules.

[xtrasimplicity]

The switch to rspec-expectations is good, too!

[xtrasimplicity]

Sorry for the delay in getting to this, @luke-hill - things have been hectic at work. :)

[aslakhellesoy]

A couple of years ago we introduced cucumber expressions as a preferred alternative to regular expressions.

If we're going to change the expressions, I think it would be best to change them to cucumber expressions as this is what we're recommending. It's also what cucumber suggests in snippets.

Would you consider changing this PR to do that?

[luke-hill]

Merging this in (Have tested that the branch earlier passed CI when adding a phantom file)