Wrong number of arguments

[nirname]

Rails 5.2

Using rspec-support 3.12.1
Using rspec-core 3.12.2
Using rspec-expectations 3.12.3
Using rspec-mocks 3.12.6
Using rspec 3.12.0
Using rspec-html-matchers 0.10.0
Using rspec-its 1.3.0
Using rspec-rails 4.0.1

When using [] for accessing hash-subject attributes

Failure/Error: its([:amount]) { is_expected.to eq(1)}

ArgumentError:
  wrong number of arguments (given 2, expected 3..5)

https://github.com/rspec/rspec-its/blob/main/lib/rspec/its.rb#L169

[pirj]

Can you please provide a bit more context about the spec you’re dealing with?

What if you set the breakpoint here, what seems off to you?

[nirname]

The part you mention works. It complains about this part

rspec-its/lib/rspec/its.rb

Line 169 in 14297a7

example(nil, *options, &block)

Although these 2 methods should be identical
https://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/1e661db5c5b431c0ee88a383e8e3767f02dccbfe/lib/rspec/core/example_group.rb#L158
and
https://github.com/rspec/rspec-core/blob/1e661db5c5b431c0ee88a383e8e3767f02dccbfe/lib/rspec/core/example_group.rb#L161
vendoring the lib and replacing example with it helped
Still not sure if it's compatibility problems

[pirj]

My apologies for being annoying. Let me repeat my questions.

Can you please provide a bit more context about the spec you’re dealing with?

What if you set the breakpoint here, what seems off to you?

[nirname]

@pirj Sorry for the long response, I'll try to reproduce this and provide more detailed description

[paniko0]

I'm having the same issue. For me, this is happening because the gem rswag overrides the method example in here

I'm not entirely sure if it's a problem of the rswag gem or the rspec-its gem. If I were to bet, I'd say changing this gem to call RSpec::Core::ExampleGroup.example instead of just example in here is easier.

[pirj]

Do you want to send a PR?

[paniko0]

I can certainly push a change, but I can't say this is going to fix OP's issue since OP didn't provide a Gemfile to compare.

[pirj]

That’s the best guess we have, and it will fix your issue that we know how to reproduce. If this it turns out not to fix the original issue, the author will reopen with details to reproduce.

[JonRowe]

Fixed in #95, I think its bad form to override this method but we have a readily accessible work around in defining our own example creation method and using it.