This was in stark contrast to the Ruby.NET test code which looks more like LISP to me than Ruby. Don't get me wrong, there's a lot to impress the Ruby enthusiast in the Ruby.NET project especially since it has been moved to an open source contribution model.
My point is simply that I have confidence that IronRuby will be true to the Ruby spirit. For one, they allow for Ruby-casing when calling .NET classes, e.g., Environment.user_name instead of Environment.UserName. For another, they've obviously been studying RSpec (this is a good thing!). This is the kind of code that I like to see behind anything that I use:
describe "range creation" do
it "creates an inclusive range object from integer literals" do
a = 0..1
a.class.name.should == "Range"
a.begin.should == 0
a.end.should == 1
a.exclude_end?.should == false
The IronRuby test suite would be a great model for the various Ruby specification projects that are out there. It's a from-the-ground-up, behavioral specification for any Ruby language implementation.
It's an exciting time for Ruby programmers who have (or want) to use .NET!