On Feb 2, 2010, at 7:18 AM, Vladimir Sizikov wrote:

> Personally, I'd consider anything (reasonable) that any
> external/public Ruby library or any other 3rd party Ruby code expects
> from the Ruby implementation to be a RubySpec worthy material.
> Otherwise, those libs/application could be working differently on
> different implementations, which is always not good. :)

There's definitely some CSV tests that could be moved over then.  I'm thinking about 90% of them.  Maybe more.  There's a lot of public API methods and options and it looked to me like RubySpec currently tests mainly two methods and one option.