consider deprecating callbacks

[cowboyd]

describeModule and friends accept a list of callbacks. E.g.

describeModule('component:x-foo', 'TestModule callbacks', {
  beforeSetup: function() {},
  setup: function() {},
  teardown: function() { },
  afterTeardown: function() {}
, function() {
// spec body
})

After using ember mocha for a while, I feel that using the callbacks mechanism is unnecessary and a result of limitations in qUnit leaking through the shared interface. The reason is because, unlike qUnit, mocha has a generalized setup and teardown api in the form of before{All,Each} and after{All,Each} hooks, I have yet to encounter a situation where they have not sufficed.

While they could remain optional via, they feel counter to the mocha way and so should not occupy such a prime portion of API real-estate. At the very least, I think that the ember cli blueprints should generate idiomatic mocha code that does setup and teardown inside before and after hooks.

[rwjblue]

@cowboyd - As long as the context of {before,after}{All,Each} is the same as the it blocks (I believe it should already be true), then I'd say lets review a PR in ember-cli-mocha changing the blueprints...

[rwjblue]

Hmm, it seems that the beforeEach/afterEach (etc) callbacks do not get the same test context.

https://github.com/switchfly/ember-mocha/blob/master/lib/ember-mocha/mocha-module.js#L21-L37 is where the callbacks are setup, and it does not seem that we are overriding these to set the proper context.

[cowboyd]

It does as of #6,

I'll open an issue on ember-cli-mocha and see if I can get around to it at some point.

[rwjblue]

@cowboyd - Awesome, I did not see that. I think we should have some tests for #6 to ensure it works properly (I reviewed the tests to see if it were supported). For example I added some tests confirming context in emberjs/ember-test-helpers#12, maybe they could be used to ensure #6 does not have regressions...

[Turbo87]

@cowboyd I think this can be considered solved, right? I'll close this, but feel free to reopen if I'm wrong!

[cowboyd]

@Turbo87 Yes, I believe it is solved, and the blueprints have been updated for some time. Thanks!